{"title":"Inhibition of cued but not executed task sets depends on cue-task compatibility and practice.","authors":"Alexander Berger, Iring Koch, Markus Kiefer","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-02013-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In task switching, processing a task cue is thought to activate the corresponding task representation (\"task set\"), thereby allowing for advance task preparation. However, the contribution of preparatory processes to the emergence of n-2 repetition costs as index of task set inhibition processes is debated. The present study investigated whether merely preparing for a task activates a corresponding task set, which needs to be inhibited in order to switch to a different task. To this end, we presented so-called task cue-only trials in trial n-2 and assessed subsequent n-2 repetition costs. The results revealed n-2 repetition costs following a task cue-only, but only for compatible cues with a transparent cue-task relation and only at the beginning of the experiment. In contrast, n-2 repetition costs following task execution in trial n-2 were absent. In a second experiment, we sought to rule out that the presence of n-2 repetition costs following a task cue-only and the corresponding absence following task execution were the consequence of a decay of task sets. This second experiment replicated the result pattern of the first experiment, with n-2 repetition costs following a task cue-only being present only at the beginning of the experiment and only for compatible cues. Hence, cue-induced task set inhibition effects depended on cue-task compatibility and practice. Furthermore, merely prepared task sets were more likely inhibited than executed task sets.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":" ","pages":"2036-2058"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11450066/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02013-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In task switching, processing a task cue is thought to activate the corresponding task representation ("task set"), thereby allowing for advance task preparation. However, the contribution of preparatory processes to the emergence of n-2 repetition costs as index of task set inhibition processes is debated. The present study investigated whether merely preparing for a task activates a corresponding task set, which needs to be inhibited in order to switch to a different task. To this end, we presented so-called task cue-only trials in trial n-2 and assessed subsequent n-2 repetition costs. The results revealed n-2 repetition costs following a task cue-only, but only for compatible cues with a transparent cue-task relation and only at the beginning of the experiment. In contrast, n-2 repetition costs following task execution in trial n-2 were absent. In a second experiment, we sought to rule out that the presence of n-2 repetition costs following a task cue-only and the corresponding absence following task execution were the consequence of a decay of task sets. This second experiment replicated the result pattern of the first experiment, with n-2 repetition costs following a task cue-only being present only at the beginning of the experiment and only for compatible cues. Hence, cue-induced task set inhibition effects depended on cue-task compatibility and practice. Furthermore, merely prepared task sets were more likely inhibited than executed task sets.
期刊介绍:
Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.