Advertisement

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 15, Issue 6, pp 1111–1116 | Cite as

Inhibition of task set: Converging evidence from task choice in the voluntary task-switching paradigm

  • Mei-Ching LienEmail author
  • Eric Ruthruff
Brief Reports

Abstract

This study looked for evidence of task-set inhibition in a voluntary task-switching paradigm. Participants performed one of three tasks on a digit: parity (even or odd), size (less than or greater than 5), or distance (near or far from 5). On each trial, they were allowed to choose which task to perform, with encouragement to perform each task equally often overall and in a random sequence. The question was whether participants would avoid performing a task that they had recently switched away from (e.g., the task performed on trial n22), because the task set was still inhibited. Results confirmed that participants strongly avoided performing the n22 task (e.g., ABA) in favor of performing other tasks (e.g., ABC). This occurred both when participants were required to switch tasks every trial (Experiment 1) and when they were allowed to repeat tasks (Experiment 2). The results suggest that a task set is inhibited during switching to a new task, reducing the likelihood that this task will be selected in the near future.

Keywords

Switch Cost Task Choice Task Switching Task Type Task Sequence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Altmann, E. M. (2007). Cue-independent task-specific representations in task-switching: Evidence from backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 892–899.Google Scholar
  3. Arbuthnott, K. D. (2005). The influence of cue type on backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 1030–1042.Google Scholar
  4. Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2004). The cost of a voluntary task switch. Psychological Science, 15, 610–615.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Arrington, C. M., & Logan, G. D. (2005). Voluntary task switching: Chasing the elusive homunculus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 683–702.Google Scholar
  6. Forstmann, B. U., Brass, M., Koch, I., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2006). Voluntary selection of task sets revealed by functional magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 388–398.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Hübner, R., Dreisbach, G., Haider, H., & Kluwe, R. H. (2003). Backward inhibition as a means of sequential task-set control: Evidence for reduction of task competition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 289–297.Google Scholar
  8. Kuhns, D., Lien, M.-C., & Ruthruff, E. (2007). Proactive vs. reactive task-set inhibition: Evidence from flanker compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 977–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lien, M.-C., Ruthruff, E., & Kuhns, D. (2006). On the difficulty of task switching: Assessing the role of task-set inhibition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 530–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lien, M.-C., Ruthruff, E., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (2005). On the limits of advance preparation for a task switch: Do people prepare all the task some of the time or some of the task all the time? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 31, 299–315.Google Scholar
  11. Mayr, U., & Bell, T. (2006). On how to be unpredictable: Evidence from the voluntary task-switching paradigm. Psychological Science, 17, 774–780.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Mayr, U., & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1423–1442.Google Scholar
  14. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ruthruff, E., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (2001). Switching between simple cognitive tasks: The interaction of top-down and bottom-up factors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 1404–1419.Google Scholar
  16. Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 92–105.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of New MexicoAlbuquerque
  2. 2.Oregon State UniversityCorvallis

Personalised recommendations