Advanced search
1 file | 89.23 KB

Increasing the Difficulty of Response Selection Does Not Increase the Switch Cost

Author
Organization
Abstract
Theories on task switching often distinguish within-task processes from between-task processes, and assume that only between-task processes contribute to task-switch costs. This conclusion is based mainly on the finding that stimulus-identification manipulations have no influence on the size of the switch cost. The present study tested if this equally holds for response selection, a within-task process that has been frequently attributed an important role in task switching. We manipulated the difficulty of response selection by using a semantically based response-side effect associated with numerical judgment tasks, namely the SNARC effect. In two experiments, we observed a SNARC effect and a switch cost, but no interaction between the two. We conclude that while response selection may trigger between-task processes that contribute to the size of the switch cost, response selection in itself does not do so.
Keywords
EXECUTIVE CONTROL, TASK-SET SELECTION, COGNITIVE CONTROL, MEMORY RETRIEVAL, FUNCTIONAL LOCUS, INHIBITION, WORKING-MEMORY, INTERFERENCE

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 89.23 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Liefooghe, Baptist, and Frederick Verbruggen. 2009. “Increasing the Difficulty of Response Selection Does Not Increase the Switch Cost.” Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology-revue Canadienne De Psychologie Experimentale 63 (4): 323–327.
APA
Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2009). Increasing the Difficulty of Response Selection Does Not Increase the Switch Cost. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE PSYCHOLOGIE EXPERIMENTALE, 63(4), 323–327.
Vancouver
1.
Liefooghe B, Verbruggen F. Increasing the Difficulty of Response Selection Does Not Increase the Switch Cost. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE PSYCHOLOGIE EXPERIMENTALE. OTTAWA: CANADIAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC; 2009;63(4):323–7.
MLA
Liefooghe, Baptist, and Frederick Verbruggen. “Increasing the Difficulty of Response Selection Does Not Increase the Switch Cost.” CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE PSYCHOLOGIE EXPERIMENTALE 63.4 (2009): 323–327. Print.
@article{884516,
  abstract     = {Theories on task switching often distinguish within-task processes from between-task processes, and assume that only between-task processes contribute to task-switch costs. This conclusion is based mainly on the finding that stimulus-identification manipulations have no influence on the size of the switch cost.   The present study tested if this equally holds for response selection, a within-task process that has been frequently attributed an important role in task switching. We manipulated the difficulty of response selection by using a semantically based response-side effect associated with numerical judgment tasks, namely the SNARC effect.  In two experiments, we observed a SNARC effect and a switch cost, but no interaction between the two. We conclude that while response selection may trigger between-task processes that contribute to the size of the switch cost, response selection in itself does not do so.},
  author       = {Liefooghe, Baptist and Verbruggen, Frederick},
  issn         = {1196-1961},
  journal      = {CANADIAN JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-REVUE CANADIENNE DE PSYCHOLOGIE EXPERIMENTALE},
  keywords     = {EXECUTIVE CONTROL,TASK-SET SELECTION,COGNITIVE CONTROL,MEMORY RETRIEVAL,FUNCTIONAL LOCUS,INHIBITION,WORKING-MEMORY,INTERFERENCE},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {323--327},
  publisher    = {CANADIAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC},
  title        = {Increasing the Difficulty of Response Selection Does Not Increase the Switch Cost},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0016725},
  volume       = {63},
  year         = {2009},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: