Neural correlates of reconfiguration failure reveal the time course of task-set reconfiguration

Steinhauser, Marco; Maier, Martin E.; Ernst, Benjamin

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.09.018

Cited by 11 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, Steinhauser and Gade (2015) used two three-choice tasks with always-incongruent stimuli, and they considered responses to the irrelevant stimulus element to be task confusions but all remaining error responses to be response confusions. Using these methods, it could be shown that task confusions can result from insufficient preparation (Meiran & Daichman, 2005;Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017), as well as from stimulus-induced task conflict (Steinhauser & Gade, 2015). As compared to simple response confusions, task confusions are associated with activity in more frontal brain areas (Desmet et al, 2011) and a reduced ERN (Ikeda & Hasegawa, 2011;Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017; but see Schroder, Moran, Moser, & Altmann, 2012).…”

Section: Error Monitoring and Posterror Adjustments In Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using these methods, it could be shown that task confusions can result from insufficient preparation (Meiran & Daichman, 2005;Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017), as well as from stimulus-induced task conflict (Steinhauser & Gade, 2015). As compared to simple response confusions, task confusions are associated with activity in more frontal brain areas (Desmet et al, 2011) and a reduced ERN (Ikeda & Hasegawa, 2011;Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017; but see Schroder, Moran, Moser, & Altmann, 2012). The latter result might come about because the corrective response tendency underlying postresponse conflict is weaker if no stable task set is adopted (Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017).…”

Section: Error Monitoring and Posterror Adjustments In Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As compared to simple response confusions, task confusions are associated with activity in more frontal brain areas (Desmet et al, 2011) and a reduced ERN (Ikeda & Hasegawa, 2011;Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017; but see Schroder, Moran, Moser, & Altmann, 2012). The latter result might come about because the corrective response tendency underlying postresponse conflict is weaker if no stable task set is adopted (Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017). Regarding posterror adjustments, task confusions lead to a specific form of nonadaptive adjustment, so-called switch benefits (Desmet, Fias, & Brass, 2012;Steinhauser & Hübner, 2006).…”

Section: Error Monitoring and Posterror Adjustments In Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such task conflict may be increased if a currently task-irrelevant stimulus dimension triggers activation of a competing task in a bottom-up fashion (e.g., Allport & Wylie, 1999, 2000Koch & Allport, 2006;Waszak, Hommel, & Allport, 2003). Moreover, beyond the response and task levels, conflict monitoring may occur at the level of postresponse conflict, where it serves as an indicator for the occurrence of errors (Yeung et al, 2004) and may support the detection of errors in individual subtasks under multitasking (Steinhauser, Maier, & Ernst, 2017).…”

Section: What Is Being Monitored?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Monitoring and control in multitasking

Schuch

Dignath²,

Steinhauser

et al. 2018

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idea that conflict detection triggers control adjustments has been considered a basic principle of cognitive control. So far, this "conflict-control loop" has mainly been investigated in the context of response conflicts in single tasks. In this theoretical position paper, we explore whether, and how, this principle might be involved in multitasking performance, as well. We argue that several kinds of conflict-control loops can be identified in multitasking at multiple levels (e.g., the response level and the task level), and we provide a selective review of empirical observations. We present examples of conflict monitoring and control adjustments in dual-task and task-switching paradigms, followed by a section on error monitoring and posterror adjustments in multitasking. We conclude by outlining future research questions regarding monitoring and control in multitasking, including the potential roles of affect and associative learning for conflict-control loops in multitasking.

show abstract

Section: Error Monitoring and Posterror Adjustments In Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Error Monitoring and Posterror Adjustments In Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Error Monitoring and Posterror Adjustments In Multitaskingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Is Being Monitored?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Monitoring and control in multitasking

Schuch

Dignath²,

Steinhauser

et al. 2018

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it seems that there are fine-tuning difficulties in ASC with assigning the needed amount of intentional control for responding to the different combinations of tasks and transitions. Nevertheless, while this interpretation may sound generally valid, further studies (applying other approaches) may be needed for a better understanding of the characteristics of CNV, and the meaning of specific differences in CNV between conditions and groups (for instance, see Steinhauser et al (2017) for an investigation of the EEG signal accompanying specific switch errors revealing new insights about posterior positivity and reconfiguration processes in task switching).…”

Section: Intentional Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Task switching in autism: An EEG study on intentions and actions

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main symptoms of Autism Spectrum Conditions (ASC) is experiencing cognitive inflexibility when adjustments of behaviour are required. While this so-called behavioural rigidity is broadly recognised in ASC, finding evidence for the underlying neurocognitive mechanisms remains challenging. In this electroencephalographic (EEG) study, participants with ASC and matched controls were instructed to choose between two cognitive tasks in each trial, and to respond to the subsequently presented target stimulus according to their task choice. While doing so, we tracked the frontally distributed contingent negative variation (CNV) during the task preparation interval as a measure of intentional control, and the posteriorly measured P3 during the task execution interval to monitor the translation of intentions into actions. The results support the notion of intentional control difficulties in ASC, where the CNV was attenuated in the ASC group compared to the control group. Furthermore, the CNV was differentiated between the tasks and transition types in the control group only, suggesting that the ASC group was less fine-tuning the required amount of intentional control to contextual circumstances. In contrast, the P3 showed no significant differences between the groups. Together, these findings highlight the importance of intentional control mechanisms as a crucial future route for a better understanding of cognitive flexibility and behavioural rigidity in ASC.

show abstract

Disentangling task-selection failures from task-execution failures in task switching: an assessment of different paradigms

Moretti

Koch

Steinhauser

et al. 2022

Psychological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Differentiating errors on the basis of the distinct cognitive mechanisms that may have generated them has provided neuropsychologists with useful diagnostic tools. For example, perseverative errors arising from the inability of the patient to set a new criterion for responding are considered one of the hallmarks of cognitive inflexibility. Similarly, in the task-switching paradigm it is possible to distinguish between task-confusion errors, produced by a failure in task selection, and response-confusion errors, arising when the correct task is selected, but the wrong response is given. Nonetheless, only a few studies so far have exploited the existence of different kinds of errors in multitasking situations to inform theories of cognitive flexibility. In the present study, we set out to use a variety of methodologies employed so far in the literature for disentangling errors due to task-selection failure from errors due to task-execution failure. In three experiments, we assessed the capacity of each method to produce error categories that can be mapped as clearly as possible to the cognitive mechanism(s) underlying them using multinomial processing tree modelling. Subsequently, the distinction between task- and response-confusion errors was used to test their differential impact on inhibitory mechanisms in task switching as measured by N-2 repetition costs. Our results are encouraging regarding the possibility of correctly detecting response- and task-selection failures, thus allowing us to assess their differential impact on N-2 repetition costs.

show abstract

Neural correlates of reconfiguration failure reveal the time course of task-set reconfiguration

Cited by 11 publications

References 46 publications

Monitoring and control in multitasking

Monitoring and control in multitasking

Task switching in autism: An EEG study on intentions and actions

Disentangling task-selection failures from task-execution failures in task switching: an assessment of different paradigms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About