Incorrect predictions reduce switch costs

Kleinsorge, Thomas; Scheil, Juliane

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.05.006

Cited by 3 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While, as shown in our previous study ( Kleinsorge and Scheil, 2015 ), incorrect guesses of an upcoming task certainly result in some kind of adaptation, there is no information available to participants allowing for an enhancement of the accuracy of future guesses. At the same time, the uncertainty inherent in the unpredictability of the environment should motivate the cognitive system to ‘try harder’ in order to attain some control over the situation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Therefore, any performance differences between these two conditions could not be due to differences in stimuli, responses, or the tasks and their sequence. Importantly, both conditions differed from the original experiment of Kleinsorge and Scheil (2015) in that the upcoming task conformed to participants’ guesses or choices in 75 percent of the trials. Whereas participants in the Choosing condition were correctly informed about this, participants in the Guessing conditions were told that the upcoming task was determined independently of their guessing response.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In the present study, we replicated the basic procedure of Experiment 2 of Kleinsorge and Scheil (2015) with the addition of another, newly designed Choosing condition. The two conditions, Guessing and Choosing, were strictly identical with the exception of the instructions given to participants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent study in the realm of task switching, we ( Kleinsorge and Scheil, 2015 ) asked participants to predict the identity of the upcoming task (Experiments 1 and 2). Since the actual task was determined quasi-randomly, participants had to resort to guessing in order to meet the task requirements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, it would corroborate our assumption that what we observed in our previous study (and sought to replicate in the Guessing condition of the present study) was not due to any confounds related to the task sequence such as different probabilities of task repetitions and task switches or disruptions of repetition-based facilitation that affected incorrectly guessed task repetitions (cf. Kleinsorge and Scheil, 2015 , for a discussion) because all these factors should affect the Guessing and Choosing conditions in the same way. Second, it would provide conclusive evidence that incorrect guesses indeed trigger a top-down process of cognitive control.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Guessing versus Choosing an Upcoming Task

Kleinsorge

Scheil

2016

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared the effects of guessing vs. choosing an upcoming task. In a task-switching paradigm with four tasks, two groups of participants were asked to either guess or choose which task will be presented next under otherwise identical conditions. The upcoming task corresponded to participants’ guesses or choices in 75 % of the trials. However, only participants in the Choosing condition were correctly informed about this, whereas participants in the Guessing condition were told that tasks were determined at random. In the Guessing condition, we replicated previous findings of a pronounced reduction of switch costs in case of incorrect guesses. This switch cost reduction was considerably less pronounced with denied choices in the Choosing condition. We suggest that in the Choosing condition, the signaling of prediction errors associated with denied choices is attenuated because a certain proportion of denied choices is consistent with the overall representation of the situation as conveyed by task instructions. In the Guessing condition, in contrast, the mismatch of guessed and actual task is resolved solely on the level of individual trials by strengthening the representation of the actual task.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Guessing versus Choosing an Upcoming Task

Kleinsorge

Scheil

2016

Front. Psychol.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Further evidence for functional differences between guessing versus choosing an upcoming task

Kleinsorge

Scheil

2018

Acta Psychologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sensorimotor Modulations by Cognitive Processes During Accurate Speech Discrimination: An EEG Investigation of Dorsal Stream Processing

Jenson¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Internal models mediate the transmission of information between anterior and posterior regions of the dorsal stream in support of speech perception, though it remains unclear how this mechanism responds to cognitive processes in service of task demands. The purpose of the current study was to identify the influences of attention and working memory on sensorimotor activity across the dorsal stream during speech discrimination, with set size and signal clarity employed to modulate stimulus predictability and the time course of increased task demands, respectively. Independent Component Analysis of 64–channel EEG data identified bilateral sensorimotor mu and auditory alpha components from a cohort of 42 participants, indexing activity from anterior (mu) and posterior (auditory) aspects of the dorsal stream. Time frequency (ERSP) analysis evaluated task-related changes in focal activation patterns with phase coherence measures employed to track patterns of information flow across the dorsal stream. ERSP decomposition of mu clusters revealed event-related desynchronization (ERD) in beta and alpha bands, which were interpreted as evidence of forward (beta) and inverse (alpha) internal modeling across the time course of perception events. Stronger pre-stimulus mu alpha ERD in small set discrimination tasks was interpreted as more efficient attentional allocation due to the reduced sensory search space enabled by predictable stimuli. Mu-alpha and mu-beta ERD in peri- and post-stimulus periods were interpreted within the framework of Analysis by Synthesis as evidence of working memory activity for stimulus processing and maintenance, with weaker activity in degraded conditions suggesting that covert rehearsal mechanisms are sensitive to the quality of the stimulus being retained in working memory. Similar ERSP patterns across conditions despite the differences in stimulus predictability and clarity, suggest that subjects may have adapted to tasks. In light of this, future studies of sensorimotor processing should consider the ecological validity of the tasks employed, as well as the larger cognitive environment in which tasks are performed. The absence of interpretable patterns of mu-auditory coherence modulation across the time course of speech discrimination highlights the need for more sensitive analyses to probe dorsal stream connectivity.

show abstract

Incorrect predictions reduce switch costs

Cited by 3 publications

References 15 publications

Guessing versus Choosing an Upcoming Task

Guessing versus Choosing an Upcoming Task

Further evidence for functional differences between guessing versus choosing an upcoming task

Sensorimotor Modulations by Cognitive Processes During Accurate Speech Discrimination: An EEG Investigation of Dorsal Stream Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About