Cognitive control: Dynamic, sustained, and voluntary influences.

Fernandez-Duque, Diego; Knight, MaryBeth

doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.340

Cited by 68 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, remember that our interval between the stimuli and the duration of the stimuli on the screen are closer to those of Mayr et al (2003) and Hommel (1998) and others have not found SCE when pure replicas are removed from the analysis Nieuwenhuis et al, 2006;Wendt et al, 2006). Therefore, the presence of SCE reinforces the idea that the SCE is due mainly to the presence of conflict (Vergruggen, Notebaert, Liefooghe & Vandierendock, 2003, Fernández-Duque & Knight, 2008Notebaert et al, 2006). However, there is a decrease of the SCE by eliminating pure replicas, which could support, in part, the points of view of Mayr et al (2003) and Hommel (1998).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Still seeking for an explanation of the Sequential Compatibility Effect

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Título: En busca de una explicación del Efecto Secuencial de Compatibilidad.Resumen: Se estudia la modulación del Efecto de Compatibilidad (EC) según la compatibilidad del ensayo previo (Efecto Secuencial de Compatibilidad, ESC) en tres tipos de tareas atencionales, flancos verbal, flancos numérico y Stroop espacial, modeladas a partir de Gratton et al., (1992). Las tareas de flancos y Stroop espacial presentan diferente complejidad cognitiva. Se analiza en estas tareas si la modulación del EC está matizada por la repetición de estímulos exactamente iguales consecutivos (puras réplicas) o es independiente de ésta. Se registran datos de tres muestras independientes (Ntotal = 1.159) para averiguar si los resultados logran reproducirse. Se observa EC para las tres tareas atencionales, pero sólo hay ESC en la tarea de Stroop espacial. El efecto se mantiene después de eliminar del análisis los ensayos que son puras réplicas, un resultado inconsistente con las propuestas de Mayr et al. (2003) y Hommel (1998) pero congruente con la Teoría del Conflicto . Además, se analiza la importancia de la complejidad cognitiva en relación a la perspectiva de Botvinick et al. (2004). Desde este punto de vista una mayor complejidad se debería reflejar en una mayor presencia de conflicto cognitivo, y, por tanto, un mayor ESC. Palabras claves: Control atencional; conflicto cognitivo; efecto de compatibilidad; efecto secuencial de compatibilidad. Abstract:The modulation of the Compatibility Effect (CE) according to the compatibility of the previous trial (Sequential Compatibility Effect, SCE) in three types of attentional tasks is explored. The flankers and spatial Stroop tasks have different degrees of cognitive complexity. In all three tasks it is analyzed whether the SCE varies when the stimuli in consecutive trials are exactly the same (pure replicas) or not. The data, collected from three independent samples (total N = 1.159), show the CE in the three tasks. However, SCE only shows up in the spatial Stroop task. The effect is smaller albeit still significant when the pure replica trials are removed, a result inconsistent with those of Mayr et al. (2003) and Hommel (1998) but consistent with the Conflict Theory . Furthermore, we also discuss the importance of cognitive complexity in relation to the perspective of Botvinick et al. (2004). From this point of view more complexity should be reflected in a greater presence of cognitive conflict, and therefore a higher SCE.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 52%

Still seeking for an explanation of the Sequential Compatibility Effect

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mayr et al, 2003;Nieuwenhuis, et al, 2006;Wendt, Kluwe, & Peters, 2006) and in the Stroop task (e.g. Fernandez-Duque & Knight, 2008). Others, however, showed sequential eVects in interference tasks even when repetition priming could be ruled out (Akçay & Hazeltine, 2007;Freitas, Bahar, Yang, & Banai, 2007;Kerns et al, 2004;Notebaert, Gevers, Verbruggen & Liefooghe, 2006;Notebaert & Verguts, 2007;Ullsperger, Bylsma & Botvinick, 2005;Wühr & Ansorge, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Precueing imminent conflict does not override sequence-dependent interference adaptation

Alpay

Goerke

Stürmer

2008

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interference effects are largely reduced after cognitive conflicts in previous trials. This sequence-dependent interference adaptation is often seen as a consequence of strategic executive control. We sought to investigate whether sequential modulations are comparable with cue-induced strategic adjustments in spatial interference tasks. If so, reliable cues indicating the next compatibility condition should override effects caused by prior events. To this end, cues were introduced in a spatial stimulus-response compatibility task and a Simon task that either indicated the upcoming trial compatibility (rule cues) or the target position, which was not related to the S-R rule (position cues). The proportion of valid cues was either completely or predominantly valid. In both tasks cueing benefits for absolutely reliable rule cues were clearly present. Remarkably, sequential modulations were not influenced by effective rule cueing and vice versa. Even absolutely reliable information about prospective control demands did not cancel out sequence-dependent interference adaptation. In addition, the contingent negative variation-an event-related brain potential in the cue-target interval that is related to response preparation and readiness-showed additive effects of preceding compatibility and cue reliability. The present results indicate that processes underlying sequence-dependent interference adaptation differ from cue-induced strategic processes of cognitive control.

show abstract

“…In contrast, there is no published evidence that the list-wide proportion congruence manipulation stimulates use of a list-wide control mechanism that affects the magnitude of Stroop interference, independently of item-specific influences (but see Fernandez-Duque & Knight, 2008, for evidence of a sustained control mechanism in a task-switching Stroop paradigm). Thus, it might be reasoned that it is time to abandon the concept of list-wide control.…”

mentioning

confidence: 90%

List-wide control is not entirely elusive: Evidence from picture–word Stroop

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stroop interference is attenuated in mostly incongruent lists, as compared with mostly congruent ones. This finding is referred to as the list-wide proportion congruence effect. The traditional interpretation refers to the strategic biasing of attention via list-wide control. In mostly incongruent lists, attention is biased away from the irrelevant words, whereas in mostly congruent lists, words are more fully processed. According to the item-specific account, the listwide proportion congruence effect reflects stimulus-driven mechanisms, and not list-wide control. The unambiguous evidence available to date strongly favors the item-specific account. Using a picture-word Stroop task, we demonstrate a list-wide proportion congruence effect for 50% congruent items that are embedded in mostly incongruent and mostly congruent lists. This novel finding illustrates that the list-wide proportion congruence effect is not entirely dependent on item-specific contributions and supports the list-wide control account. We discuss factors impacting the emergence of listwide control in Stroop tasks. Keywords Cognitive and attentional control . StroopHundreds of studies have examined Stroop interference, the increased reaction time (RT) to name the ink color on incongruent (e.g., blue in red) relative to congruent (e.g., blue in blue) trials. Yet the mechanisms used to resolve Stroop interference remain the target of rich theoretical debate (MacLeod, 1991). The present study addresses the debate surrounding the mechanism(s) underlying the listwide proportion congruence effect, the robust finding that Stroop interference is attenuated in mostly incongruent (MI) lists, as compared with mostly congruent (MC) lists

show abstract

Cognitive control: Dynamic, sustained, and voluntary influences.

Cited by 68 publications

References 51 publications

Still seeking for an explanation of the Sequential Compatibility Effect

Still seeking for an explanation of the Sequential Compatibility Effect

Precueing imminent conflict does not override sequence-dependent interference adaptation

List-wide control is not entirely elusive: Evidence from picture–word Stroop

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About