Abstract
The concept of inhibition plays a major role in cognitive psychology. In the present article, we review the evidence for the inhibition of task sets. In the first part, we critically discuss empirical findings of task inhibition from studies that applied variants of the task-switching methodology and argue that most of these findings— such as switch cost asymmetries—are ambiguous. In the second part, we focus on n-22 task-repetition costs, which currently constitute the most convincing evidence for inhibition of task sets. n-22 repetition costs refer to the performance impairment in sequences of the ABA type relative to CBA, which can be interpreted in terms of persisting inhibition of previously abandoned tasks. The available evidence suggests that inhibition is primarily triggered by conflict at selection of stimulus attributes and at the response level. Author Note
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
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: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Allport, A, & Wylie, G. (1999). Task-switching: Positive and negative priming of task-set. In G. W. Humphreys, J. Duncan, & A. M. Treisman (Eds.), Attention, space and action: Studies in cognitive neuroscience (pp. 273–296). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
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.
Altmann, E. M, & Gray, W. D. (2008). An integrated model of cognitive control in task switching. Psychological Review, 115, 602–639.
Arbuthnott, K. (2005). The influence of cue type on backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 1030–1042.
Arbuthnott, K. (2008a). Asymmetric switch costs and backward inhibition: Carryover activation and inhibition in switching between tasks of unequal difficulty. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 91–100.
Arbuthnott, K. D. (2008b). The effect of task location and task type on backward inhibition. Memory & Cognition, 36, 534–543.
Arbuthnott, K. D. (2009). The representational locus of spatial influence on backward inhibition. Memory & Cognition, 37, 522–528.
Arbuthnott, K, & Frank, J. (2000). Executive control in set switching: Residual switch costs and task-set inhibition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 33–41.
Arbuthnott, K, & Woodward, T. S. (2002). The influence of cue-task association and location on switch cost and alternating-switch cost. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 18–29.
Aron, A. R, Robbins, T. W, & Poldrack, R. A. (2004). Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 171–177.
Bao, M, Li, Z.-H, Chen, X.-C, & Zhang, D. R. (2006). Backward inhibition in a task of switching attention within verbal working memory. Brain Research Bulletin, 69, 214–221.
Barkley, R. A. (1997). Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 65–94.
Botvinick, M. M, Braver, T. S, Barch, D. M, Carter, C. S, & Cohen, J. D. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652.
Botvinick, M. M, Cohen, J. D, & Carter, C. S. (2004). Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: An update. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 539–546.
Brown, J. W, Reynolds, J. R, & Braver, T. S. (2007). A computational model of fractionated conflict-control mechanisms in taskswitching. Cognitive Psychology, 55, 37–85.
Campbell, J. I. D. (2005). Asymmetrical language switching costs in Chinese-English bilinguals’ number naming and simple arithmetic. Bilingualism: Language & Cognition, 8, 85–91.
Costa, A, & Santesteban, M. (2004). Lexical access in bilingual speech production: Evidence from langauge switching in highly proficient bilinguals and L2 learners. Journal of Memory & Language, 50, 491–511.
Costa, A, Santesteban, M, & Ivanova, I. (2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 1057–1074.
Davidson, M. C, Amso, D, Anderson, L. C, & Diamond, A. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2037–2078.
Dell, G. S, Burger, L. K, & Svec, W. R. (1997). Language production and serial order: A functional analysis and a model. Psychological Review, 104, 123–147.
Dreher, J.-C, & Berman, K. F. (2002). Fractionating the neural substrate of cognitive control processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99, 14595–14600.
Dreisbach, G, Haider, H, & Kluwe, R. H. (2002). Preparatory processes in the task switching paradigm: Evidence from the use of probability cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 28, 468–483.
Druey, M, & Hübner, R. (2007). The role of temporal cue-target overlap in backward inhibition under task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 749–754.
Egner, T. (2008). Multiple conflict-driven control mechanisms in the human brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 374–380.
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.
Fales, C. L, Vanek, Z. F, & Knowlton, B. J. (2006). Backward inhibition in Parkinson’s disease. Neuropsychologia, 44, 1041–1049.
Finkbeiner, M, Almeida, J, Janssen, N, & Caramazza, A. (2006). Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 1075–1089.
Forstmann, B, Brass, M, & Koch, I. (2007). Methodological and empirical issues when dissociating cue-related from task-related processes in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Psychological Research, 71, 393–400.
Gade, M, & Koch, I. (2005). Linking inhibition to activation in the control of task sequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 530–534.
Gade, M, & Koch, I. (2007). The influence of overlapping response sets on task inhibition. Memory & Cognition, 35, 603–609.
Gade, M, & Koch, I. (2008). Dissociating cue-related and task-related processes in task inhibition: Evidence from using a 2:1 cue-to-task mapping. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 51–55.
Gilbert, S, & Shallice, T. (2002). Task switching: A PDP model. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 297–337.
Goschke, T. (2000). Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task-set switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 333–355). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Grange, J. A, & Houghton, G. (2009). Temporal cue-target overlap is not essential for backward inhibition in task switching. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1068–2079.
Gratton, G, Coles, M. G. H, & Donchin, E. (1992). Optimizing the use of information: Strategic control of activation of responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 121, 480–506.
Holroyd, C. B, & Coles, M. G. H. (2002). The neural basis of human error processing: Reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the errorrelated negativity. Psychological Review, 109, 679–709.
Horoufchin, H, Philipp, A. M, & Koch, I. (2009). The dissipating task-repetition benefit in task switching: Task-set decay or temporal distinctiveness in episodic task retrieval? Manuscript submitted for publication.
Houghton, G, Pritchard, R, & Grange, J. A. (2009). The role of cue-target translation in backward inhibition of attentional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 35, 466–476.
Houghton, G, & Tipper, S. P. (1996). Inhibitory mechanisms of neural and cognitive control: Application to selective attention and sequential action. Brain & Cognition, 30, 20–43.
Hübner, M, 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.
Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Psychology, whole No. 89.
Johnson, A, & Proctor, R. W. (Eds.) (2004). Attention: Theory and practice. London: Sage.
Jonides, J, & Mack, R. (1984). On the cost and benefit of cost and benefit. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 29–44.
Kahneman, D, & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.
Klein, R. M. (2000). Inhibition of return. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 138–147.
Koch, I. (2008). Instruction effects in task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 448–452.
Koch, I, & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulusbased priming of tasks in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 34, 433–444.
Koch, I, Gade, M, & Philipp, A. M. (2004). Inhibition of response mode in task switching. Experimental Psychology, 51, 52–58.
Koch, I, & Philipp, A. M. (2005). Effects of response selection on the task repetition benefit in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 33, 624–634.
Koch, I, Philipp, A. M, & Gade, M. (2006). Chunking in task sequences modulates task inhibition. Psychological Science, 17, 346–350.
Koch, I, Prinz, W, & Allport, A. (2005). Involuntary retrieval in alphabet-arithmetic tasks: Task-mixing and task-switching costs. Psychological Research, 69, 252–261.
Kramer, A. F, & Madden, D. J. (2008). Attention. In F. I. M. Craik & T. A. Salthouse (Eds.), The handbook of aging and cognition (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kroll, J. F, Bobba, S. C, Misrab, M, & Guoc, T. (2008). Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes. Acta Psychologica, 128, 416–430.
Kuhns, D, Lien, M.-C, & Ruthruff, E. (2007). Proactive versus reactive task-set inhibition: Evidence from flanker compatibility effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 977–983.
Levy, B. J, & Anderson, M. C. (2002). Inhibitory processes and the control of memory retrieval. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 299–305.
Lien, M.-C, & Ruthruff, E. (2008). Inhibition of task set: Converging evidence from task choice in the voluntary task-switching paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1111–1116.
Logan, G. D. (1994). On the ability to inhibit thought and action: A users’ guide to the stop signal paradigm. In D. Dagenbach & T. H. Carr (Eds.), Inhibitory processes in attention, memory, and language. San Diego: Academic Press.
Logan, G. D, & Bundesen, C. (2003). Clever homunculus: Is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task cuing procedure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 575–599.
Los, S. A. (1996). On the origin of mixing costs: Exploring information processing in pure and mixed blocks of trials. Acta Psychologica, 94, 145–188.
MacLeod, C. M, Dodd, M. D, Sheard, E. D, Wilson, D. E, & Bibi, U. (2003). In opposition to inhibition. Psychology of Learning & Motivation, 43, 163–214.
MacLeod, C. M, & MacDonald, P. A. (2000). Interdimensional interference in the Stroop effect: Uncovering the cognitive and neural anatomy of attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4, 383–391.
Masson, M. E. J, Bub, D. N, Woodward, T. S, & Chan, J. C. K. (2003). Modulation of word-reading processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 400–418.
Mayr, U. (2001). Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. Psychology & Aging, 16, 96–109.
Mayr, U. (2002). Inhibition of action rules. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 93–99.
Mayr, U. (2006). What matters in the cued task-switching paradigm: Tasks or cues? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 794–799.
Mayr, U. (2007). Inhibition of task sets. In D. S. Gorfein & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), Inhibition in cognition (pp. 27–44). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Mayr, U. (2009). Sticky plans: Inhibition and binding during serial task control. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 123–153.
Mayr, U, Diedrichsen, J, Ivry, R, & Keele, S. W. (2006). Dissociating task-set selection from task-set inhibition in the prefrontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 14–21.
Mayr, U, & Keele, S. W. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4–26.
Mayr, U, & Kliegl, R. (2003). Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 362–372.
Meiran, N. (2000a). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psychological Research, 63, 234–249.
Meiran, N. (2000b). The reconfiguration of the stimulus task-set and the response task-set during task switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 377–400). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Meiran, N. (in press). Task switching: Mechanisms underlying rigid vs. flexible self control. In R. Hassin, K. Ochsner, & Y. Trope (Eds.), Social cognition and social neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press.
Meiran, N, & Kessler, Y. (2008). The task rule congruency effect in task switching reflects activated long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 137–157.
Meuter, R. F. I. (2005). Language selection in bilinguals: Mechanisms and processes of change. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 349–370). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Meuter, R. F. I, & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory & Language, 40, 25–40.
Monsell, S. (1996). Control of mental processes. In V. Bruce (Ed.), Unsolved mysteries of the mind: Tutorial essays in cognition (pp. 93–148). Hove, U.K.: Erlbaum, Taylor & Francis.
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140.
Monsell, S, & Mizon, G. A. (2006). Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an “endogenous” task-set reconfiguration process? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 493–516.
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.
Moritz, S, Hübner, M, & Kluwe, R. (2004). Task switching and backward inhibition in obsessive-compulsive disorder. Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology, 26, 677–683.
Neill, W. T. (1997). Episodic retrieval in negative priming and repetition priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 23, 1291–3105.
Neill, W. T. (2007). Mechanisms of transfer-inappropriate processing. In D. S. Gorfein & C. M. MacLeod (Eds.), Inhibition in cognition (pp. 63–78). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Nicholson, R. A, Karayanidis, F, Davies, A, & Michie, P. T. (2006). Components of task-set reconfiguration: Differential effects of “switchto” and “switch-away” cues. Brain Research, 1121, 160–176.
Nigg, J. T. (2000). On inhibition/disinhibition in developmental psychopathology: Views from cognitive and personality psychology and a working inhibition taxonomy. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 220–246.
Nigg, J. T. (2001). Is ADHD a disinhibitory disorder? Psychological Bulletin, 127, 571–598.
Philipp, A. M, Gade, M, & Koch, I. (2007). Inhibitory processes in language switching? Evidence from switching language-defined response sets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 395–416.
Philipp, A. M, Jolicoeur, P, Falkenstein, M, & Koch, I. (2007). Response selection and response execution in task switching: Evidence from a go-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 1062–1075.
Philipp, A. M, Kalinich, C, Koch, I, & Schubotz, R. I. (2008). Mixing costs and switch costs when switching stimulus dimensions in serial predictions. Psychological Research, 72, 405–414.
Philipp, A. M, & Koch, I. (2005). Switching of response modalities. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58A, 1325–1338.
Philipp, A. M, & Koch, I. (2006). Task inhibition and task repetition in task switching. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 18, 624–639.
Philipp, A. M, & Koch, I. (2009). Inhibition in language switching: What is inhibited when switching among languages in naming tasks? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 35, 1187–1195.
Poljac, E, Koch, I, & Bekkering, H. (2009). Dissociating restart costs and mixing costs in task switching. Psychological Research, 73, 407–416.
Posner, M. I, & Cohen, Y. (1984). Components of visual orienting. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X: Control of language processes (pp. 531–554). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rogers, R. D, & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.
Rubin, O, & Meiran, N. (2005). On the origin of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 31, 1477–1491.
Schneider, D. W. (2007). Task-set inhibition in chunked task sequences. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 970–976.
Schneider, D. W, & Logan, G. D. (2005). Modeling task switching without switching tasks: A short-term priming account of explicitly cued performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 343–367.
Schneider, D. W, & Verbruggen, F. (2008). Inhibition of irrelevant category-response mappings. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1629–1640.
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.
Schuch, S, & Koch, I. (2004). The costs of changing the representation of action: Response repetition and response-response compatibility in dual tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 566–582.
Sdoia, S, & Ferlazzo, F. (2008). Stimulus-related inhibition of task set during task switching. Experimental Psychology, 55, 322–327.
Sinai, M, Goffaux, P, & Phillips, N. A. (2007). Cue- versus response-locked processes in backward inhibition: Evidence from ERPs. Psychophysiology, 44, 596–609.
Smith, R. (1992). Inhibition. History and meaning in the sciences of mind and brain. London: Free Association Book.
Spector, A, & Biederman, I. (1976). Mental set and mental shift revisited. American Journal of Psychology, 89, 669–679.
Steinhauser, M, & Hübner, R. (2006). Response-based strengthening in task shifting: Evidence from shift effects produced by errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 517–534.
Steinhauser, M, & Hübner, R. (2008). How task errors affect subsequent behavior: Evidence from distributional analyses of task-switching effects. Memory & Cognition, 36, 979–990.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.
Stürmer, B, Leuthold, H, Soetens, E, Schröter, H, & Sommer, W. (2002). Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 1345–1363.
Tipper, S. P. (1985). The negative priming effect: Inhibitory priming by ignored objects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 571–590.
Tipper, S. P. (2001). Does negative priming reflect inhibitory mechanisms? A review and integration of conflicting views. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54A, 321–343.
Verbruggen, F, Liefooghe, B, Szmalec, A, & Vandierendonck, A. (2005). Inhibiting responses when switching: Does it matter? Experimental Psychology, 52, 125–130.
Verbruggen, F, Liefooghe, B, & Vandierendonck, A. (2006). Selective stopping in task switching: The role of response selection and response execution. Experimental Psychology, 53, 48–57.
Verbruggen, F, & Logan, G. D. (2009). Models of response inhibition in the stop-signal and stop-change paradigms. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 33, 647–661.
Wendt, M, Kluwe, R. H, & Peters, A. (2006). Sequential modulations of interference evoked by processing task-irrelevant stimulus features. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 644–667.
Whitmer, A, & Banich, M. (2007). Inhibition versus switching deficits in different forms of rumination. Psychological Science, 18, 546–553.
Yeung, N, Botvinick, M. M, & Cohen, J. D. (2004). The neural basis of error detection: Conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity. Psychological Review, 111, 931–959.
Yeung, N, & Monsell, S. (2003a). The effects of recent practice on task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 919–936.
Yeung, N, & Monsell, S. (2003b). Switching between tasks of unequal familiarity: The role of stimulus-attribute and response-set selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 455–469.
Yeung, N, Nystrom, L. E, Aronson, J. A, & Cohen, J. D. (2006). Between-task competition and cognitive control in task switching. Journal of Neuroscience, 26, 1429–1438.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by Grants KO2045/4-1, KO2045/4-2, and KO2045/4-3 of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S. et al. The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 17, 1–14 (2010). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.1.1
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.1.1