Abstract
Task switching was examined under predictable and unpredictable circumstances. In the first two experiments (in predictable conditions), the upcoming task was determined by the trial sequence. In unpredictable conditions, this task was signaled by the stimulus. Under speeded conditions, participants had to judge either the parity of a digit or the vowel/consonant nature of a letter. On bivalent trials, a digit and a letter were presented. On univalent trials, a task-relevant character occurred alongside a task-irrelevant character (e.g., “&”). Task-switching costs were found, and response times were generally slower on bivalent than on univalent trials. This crosstalk effect was reduced when a task repetition was expected. In the final experiment, trial predictability was defined according to whether a task precue was presented prior to or concurrently with the trial stimulus. Contrasting patterns of crosstalk effects were obtained and are discussed in terms of exogenous and endogenous factors that affect task switching.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Allport, D. A., & Wylie, G. (1999). Task-switching: Positive and negative priming of task-set. In G. W. Humphreys, J. Duncan, & A. Treisman (Eds.), Attention, space, and action: Studies in cognitive neuroscience (pp. 273–296). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Allport, D. A., & Wylie, G. (2000). Task switching, stimulus-response bindings, and negative priming. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 35–70). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Altmann, E. M. (2004). The preparation effect in task switching: Carryover of SOA. Memory & Cognition, 32, 153–163.
Altmann, E. M. (2007). Comparing switch costs: Alternating runs and explicit cuing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 475–483. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.475
Altmann, E. M., & Gray, W. D. (2008). An integrated model of cognitive control in task switching. Psychological Review, 115, 602–639. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.3.602
Bakeman, R., & McArthur, D. (1996). Picturing repeated measures: Comments on Loftus, Morrison, and others. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 584–589.
Brown, J. W., Reynolds, J. R., & Braver, T. S. (2007). A computational model of fractionated conflict-control mechanisms in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 55, 37–85. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.09.005
DeJong, R. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 357–376). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.
Gilbert, S. J., & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297–337. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0770
Gopher, D., Armony, L., & Greenshpan, Y. (2000). Switching tasks and attention policies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 308–339.
Goschke, T. (2000). Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task set switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 331–355). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hommel, B. (1997). Interactions between stimulus-stimulus congruence and stimulus-response compatibility. Psychological Research, 59, 248–260. doi:10.1007/BF00439302
Karayanidis, F., Mansfield, E. L., Galloway, K. L., Smith, J. L., Provost, A., & Heathcote, A. (2009). Anticipatory reconfiguration elicited by fully and partially informative cues that validly predict a switch in task. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 9, 202–215. doi:10.3758/CABN.9.2.202
Keppel, G., & Wickens, T. D. (2004). Design and analysis: A researcher’s handbook (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Koch, I. (2003). The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 488–492.
Koch, I. (2005). Sequential task predictability in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 107–112.
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility—A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.
Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1423–1442.
Meiran, N. (2000a). Modelling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234–249. doi:10.1007/s004269900004
Meiran, N. (2000b). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 377–399). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Meiran, N. (2005). Task rule-congruency and Simon-like effects in switching between spatial tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1023–1041. doi:10.1080/02724980443000421
Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211–253. doi:10.1006/ cogp.2000.0736
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140. doi:10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
Monsell, S., Sumner, P., & Waters, H. (2003). Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches. Memory & Cognition, 31, 327–342.
Monsell, S., Taylor, T. J., & Murphy, K. (2001). Naming the color of a word: Is it responses or task sets that compete? Memory & Cognition, 29, 137–151.
Monsell, S., Yeung, N., & Azuma, R. (2000). Reconfiguration of task-set: Is it easier to switch to the weaker task? Psychological Research, 63, 250–264. doi:10.1007/s004269900005
Pashler, H. E. (2000). Task switching and multitask performance. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 277–307). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Quinlan, P. T., & Dyson, B. J. (2008). Cognitive psychology. Harlow, U.K.: Pearson.
Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–301.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
Simon, J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T. G. Reeves (Eds.), Stimulus-response compatibility (pp. 31–86). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Sohn, M.-H., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Task preparation and task repetition: Two-component model of task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 764–778.
Sohn, M.-H., & Carlson, R. A. (2000). Effects of repetition and foreknowledge in task-set reconfiguration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 1445–1460.
Tornay, F. J., & Milán, E. G. (2001). A more complete task-set reconfiguration in random than in predictable task switch. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 785–803.
Zhang, H., Zhang, J., & Kornblum, S. (1999). A parallel distributed processing model of stimulus-stimulus and stimulus-response compatibility. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 386–432. doi:10.1006/ cogp.1998.0703
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Andreadis, N., Quinlan, P.T. Task switching under predictable and unpredictable circumstances. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics 72, 1776–1790 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.7.1776
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.7.1776