An Episodic Model of Task Switching Effects: Erasing the Homunculus from Memory

Schmidt, James J. R.; Liefooghe, Baptist; Houwer, Jan De

doi:10.5334/joc.97

Cited by 16 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 162 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this respect, the current findings may be cautiously taken to align with research on the n − 2 task repetition cost in questioning an extensive role for top-down inhibition of task sets in setting the cognitive flexibility-stability balance (cf. Schmidt & Liefooghe, 2016; Schmidt et al, 2020a, 2020b). We hope that future studies will provide more dedicated explorations into the links between instruction following and task switching paradigms.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tenacious instructions: How to dismantle newly instructed task rules?

Abrahamse¹,

Braem²,

Houwer³

et al. 2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans excel in instruction following to boost performance in unfamiliar situations. We can do so through so-called prepared reflexes: Abstract instructions are instantly translated into appropriate task rules in procedural working memory, after which imperative stimuli directly trigger their corresponding responses in a ballistic, reflex-like manner. But how much control do we have over these instructed task rules when their reflexes suddenly lose their relevance? Inspired by the phenomenon of directed forgetting in declarative working memory, we here tested across four experiments whether the presentation of (implicit or explicit) task cancellation cues results in the directed dismantling of recently instructed task rules. Our findings suggest that-even when cancelation cues are actively processed-such dismantling does not occur (Experiment 1-3) unless the no-longer relevant task rules are replaced by a new set of rules (Experiment 4). These findings and their implications are discussed in the broader context of action control and working memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tenacious instructions: How to dismantle newly instructed task rules?

Abrahamse¹,

Braem²,

Houwer³

et al. 2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This conclusion is in line with previous demonstrations, which indicate that instructions (e.g., Liefooghe et al, 2012), verbal messages (e.g., Pfeuffer et al, 2017), or even derived learning (Liefooghe et al, 2020) can induce automaticity. As such, accounts of automaticity should be elaborated to accommodate such alternative pathways of learning (see Schmidt et al, 2020 for an example). On the other hand, the present results suggest that the benefit of imagery techniques in skill acquisition (see Driskell et al, 1994 for a meta-analysis) may be based on the formation of episodes in memory during practice, which over time lead to automatic behaviour.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic effects of covert practice

Liefooghe

Jim

Houwer

2021

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Automatic behavior is supposedly underlain by the unintentional retrieval of processing episodes, which are stored during the repeated overt practice of a task or activity. In the present study, we investigated whether covertly practicing a task (e.g., repeatedly imagining responding to a stimulus) also leads to the storage of processing episodes and thus to automatic behavior. Participants first either responded overtly or covertly to stimuli according to a first categorization task in a practice phase. We then measured the presence of automatic response-congruency effects in a subsequent test phase that involved a different categorization task but the same stimuli and responses. Our results indicate that covert practice can lead to a response-congruency effect. We conclude that covert practice can lead to automatic behavior and discuss the different components of covert practice, such as motor imagery, visual imagery, and inner speech, that contribute to the formation of processing episodes in memory.

show abstract

“…The sequence of stimulus combinations was randomised in mixed task-order blocks and constant (with respect to the order of the horizontal and the vertical arrow) in fixed task-order blocks. The occurrence of stimulus and response repetitions was not restricted (e.g., see Schmidt et al, 2020), as any effects of repetition priming should have similar effects on performance in both tasks and order conditions. In single-task blocks, the task-relevant stimulus was always presented first.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?

Huestegge

Hoffmann

Strobach

2021

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In situations requiring the execution of two tasks at around the same time, we need to decide which of the tasks should be executed first. Previous research has revealed several factors that affect the outcome of such response order control processes, including bottom-up factors (e.g., the temporal order of the stimuli associated with the two tasks) and top-down factors (e.g., instructions). In addition, it has been shown that tasks associated with certain response modalities are preferably executed first (e.g., temporal prioritisation of tasks involving oculomotor responses). In this study, we focused on a situation in which task order has to be unpredictably switched from trial to trial and asked whether task-order representations are coded separately or integrated with the component task sets (i.e., in a task-specific manner). Across three experiments, we combined two tasks known to differ in prioritisation, namely an oculomotor and a manual (or pedal) task. The results indicated robust task-order switch costs (i.e., longer RTs when task order was switched vs. repeated). Importantly, the data demonstrate that it is possible to show an asymmetry of task-order switch costs: While these costs were of similar size for both task orders in one particular experimental setting with specific spatial task characteristics, two experiments consistently indicated that it was easier for participants to switch to their prioritised task order (i.e., to execute the dominant oculomotor task first). This suggests that in a situation requiring frequent task-order switches (indicated by unpredictable changes in stimulus order), task order is represented in an integrated, task-specific manner, bound to characteristics (here, associated effector systems) of the component tasks.

show abstract

An Episodic Model of Task Switching Effects: Erasing the Homunculus from Memory

Cited by 16 publications

References 162 publications

Tenacious instructions: How to dismantle newly instructed task rules?

Tenacious instructions: How to dismantle newly instructed task rules?

Automatic effects of covert practice

Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About