Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Outsourcing control to the environment: effects of stimulus/response locations on task selection

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Psychological Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Response-time and accuracy costs as assessed in the context of the task-switching paradigm are usually thought to represent processes involved in the selection of abstract task sets. However, task sets are also applied to specific stimulus and response constellations, which in turn may become associated with task-set representations. To explore the consequence of such associations, we used a task-switching paradigm in which subjects had to select between two tasks (color or orientation discrimination) that were either associated with shared or unique stimulus/response locations on a touchscreen. When each task was associated with unique locations, error switch costs, stimulus–response congruency effects, as well as the characteristic task-switch × repetition-priming interaction were eliminated, and global selection costs were substantially reduced. These results demonstrate that to understand standard task-switching phenomena it is critical to consider links between lower level stimulus/response parameters and task sets.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. While this effect might suggest a speed-accuracy tradeoff, the critical error effect remained reliable, F(1,9)=5.3, P<0.05, after dropping six subjects with the largest reversed RT interaction (resulting in a near-zero RT interaction of 2 ms). Also, Table 1 indicates that the RT effect is mainly due to switch cost differences between the dual-object univalent and single-object univalent conditions. When the RT effect was analyzed for the bivalent condition alone, the relevant interaction was no longer present, F(1,15)=0.7, P>0.4, but still highly reliable for errors, F(1,15)=10.7, P<0.01. The larger RT switch cost in the univalent, dual-object condition may reflect increased demands of switching response locations that may be particularly pronounced in the overall faster univalent trials.

References

  • Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Switching intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta, & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV, (pp. 421–452). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Awh, E., Sgarlata, A. M., Kliestik, J. (2005). Resolving visual interference during covert spatial orienting: Online attentional control through static records of prior visual experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134 (2), 192–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryck, R. L., Mayr, U. (2005). On the role of verbalization during task-set selection: Switching or serial order control? Memory and Cognition 33 (4), 611–623

    Google Scholar 

  • Creem, S. H., & Proffitt, D. R. (2001). Grasping objects by their handles: A necessary interaction between cognition and action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 218–228.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hommel, B. (2005). Feature integration across perception and action: Event files affect response choice. Psychological Research. This issue

  • Hommel, B. (2004). Event files: Feature binding in and across perception and action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 494–500.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Psychology, Whole No. 89.

  • Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 476–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marczinski, C. A., Milliken, B., & Nelson, S. (2003). Aging and repetition effects: Separate specific and nonspecific influences. Psychology and Aging, 18, 780–790.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, U. (2001). Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. Psychology and Aging, 16, 96–109.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, U., & Bryck, R. B. (2005). Sticky rules: Integration between abstract rules and specific actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31 (2), 337–350.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr, U., & Keele, S. (2000). Changing internal constraints on action: The role of backward inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 4–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayr. U., & Kliegl, R. (2003). Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 362–372.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 1423–1442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meiran, N. (2000). 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. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monsell, S. (2003) Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). The cost of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, D. A., Kenny, S., & Derr, M. A. (1983). Hierarchical control of rapid movement sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 86–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • 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 and Performance, 30, 566–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Spector, A., & Biederman, I. (1976). Mental set and mental shift revisited. American Journal of Psychology, 89, 669–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wenke, D., Gaschler R., & Nattkemper, D. (2005). Instruction-induced feature binding. Psychological Research. This issue

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funded through NIA grant R01 AG19296-01A1 to Ulrich Mayr.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR, 97403, USA

    Ulrich Mayr & Richard L. Bryck

Authors
  1. Ulrich Mayr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard L. Bryck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ulrich Mayr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mayr, U., Bryck, R.L. Outsourcing control to the environment: effects of stimulus/response locations on task selection. Psychological Research 71, 107–116 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0039-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0039-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation