Cognitive task performance is a dynamic process that evolves over time, starting from the first encounters with a task. An important aspect of these task dynamics is the employment of strategies to support successful performance and task acquisition. Focusing on episodic memory performance, we: (1) tested two hypotheses on the effects of novelty and task difficulty on strategy use; (2) replicated our previous results regarding strategy use in a novel memory task; and (3) evaluated whether repeated open-ended strategy queries affect task performance and/or strategy use. The present pre-registered online study comprised 161 adult participants who were recruited through the Prolific crowdsourcing platform. We employed two separate 5-block list learning tasks, one with 10 pseudowords and the other with 18 common nouns, and collected recall performance and strategy reports for each block. Using Bayesian linear mixed effects models, the present findings (1) provide some support for the hypothesis that task-initial strategy development is not triggered only by task novelty, but can appear also in a familiar, moderately demanding task; (2) replicate earlier findings from an adaptive working memory task indicating strategy use from the beginning of a task, associations between strategy use and objective task performance, and only modest agreement between open-ended vs. list-based strategy reports; and (3) indicate that repeated open-ended strategy reports do not affect objective recall. We conclude that strategy use is an important aspect of memory performance right from the start of a task, and it undergoes development at the initial stages depending on task characteristics. In a larger perspective, the present results concur with the views of skill learning and adaptivity in cognitive task performance.
We examined the role of general inhibitory control and general set shifting processes in bilingual language production in 51 native Finnish speakers with English as L2, mainly learnt after the age of 7. We tested the hypothesis that inhibitory control, measured with the Simon and Flanker tasks, is central when switching into L1 (Green, 1998) and, more generally, that general set shifting processes, measured with the Number-Letter task, underlie language switching and mixing (Meuter & Allport, 1999). The results were inconsistent. The basic language switch cost effects were in line with the inhibitory control model, but the interactions with the executive tasks did not support the model and were partly contrary to it. The general set shifting hypothesis received some support. Alternative explanations of the sources of the switching and mixing cost asymmetries in bilingual language production are discussed.
We examined the relationship between self-reported everyday language switching experience and the performance of early bilinguals in tasks measuring different executive functions. Our participants were Finnish-Swedish early bilinguals, aged 16-41 years (N = 66, Experiment 1) and 18-69 years (N = 111, Experiment 2). An earlier study using a sample from a similar population discovered a negative relationship between self-reported language switching and a mixing cost in error rates in a number-letter task. This finding was not replicated. Instead, we found that a higher rate of reported contextual language switching predicted larger switching cost reaction times in the number-letter task, and that a higher rate of reported unintended language switches predicted larger error rates in a spatial n-back task. We conclude that these results likely reflect individual differences in executive skills, and do not provide evidence for the hypothesis that language switching trains executive functions. ARTICLE HISTORY ). On the other hand, many of the more recent studies suggest that the performance of bilinguals is equal to, or even weaker than, that of mono-
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.