Abstract

In task-switching paradigms, performance is better when repeating the same task than when alternating between tasks (switch cost) and when repeating a task alone rather than intermixed with another task (mixing cost). These costs remain even after extensive practice and when task cues enable advanced preparation (residual costs). Moreover, residual reaction time mixing cost has been consistently shown to increase with age. Residual switch and mixing costs modulate the amplitude of the stimulus-locked P3b. This mixing effect is disproportionately larger in older adults who also prepare more for and respond more cautiously on these “mixed” repeat trials (Karayanidis et al., 2011). In this paper, we analyze stimulus-locked and response-locked P3 and lateralized readiness potentials to identify whether residual switch and mixing cost arise from the need to control interference at the level of stimulus processing or response processing. Residual mixing cost was associated with control of stimulus-level interference, whereas residual switch cost was also associated with a delay in response selection. In older adults, the disproportionate increase in mixing cost was associated with greater interference at the level of decision-response mapping and response programming for repeat trials in mixed-task blocks. These findings suggest that older adults strategically recruit greater proactive and reactive control to overcome increased susceptibility to post-stimulus interference. This interpretation is consistent with recruitment of compensatory strategies to compensate for reduced repetition benefit rather than an overall decline on cognitive flexibility.

Highlights

  • Cognitive control encompasses proactive and reactive control processes to adjust and maintain goal-directed behavior (Braver, 2012)

  • The rate of the age effect was disproportionately larger for mixedrepeat trials, resulting in no significant difference between switch and mixed-repeat trials in the older age range for drift rate

  • Together these findings suggest that, unlike younger adults, older adults do not show a repetition priming benefit on responserelated processes for mixed-repeat trials. This is broadly consistent with previous evidence that older adults benefit less from priming in both task-switching (Cepeda et al, 2001) and repetition priming (e.g., Karayanidis et al, 1993) paradigms. In conclusion, these findings show that residual mixing cost arises from stimulus-level interference, whereas residual switch cost arises from post-stimulus interference affecting both stimulus evaluation and response selection

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Cognitive control encompasses proactive (e.g., anticipatory engagement and maintenance of task goals) and reactive control processes (e.g., conflict monitoring and interference resolution) to adjust and maintain goal-directed behavior (Braver, 2012). Mixing cost is estimated as the performance difference between mixedrepeat and all-repeat trials (i.e., trials in a single-task block) and is attributed to increased demands on working memory, greater task ambiguity, and/or failure to fully disengage the alternative taskset (e.g., Mayr, 2001; Meiran and Gotler, 2001). Mixing cost is estimated as the performance difference between mixedrepeat and all-repeat trials (i.e., trials in a single-task block) and is attributed to increased demands on working memory, greater task ambiguity, and/or failure to fully disengage the alternative taskset (e.g., Mayr, 2001; Meiran and Gotler, 2001)1 Both mixing cost and switch cost reduce as the cue-stimulus interval increases, indicating the engagement of proactive control processes. Even under prepared task conditions, reactive control processes may be activated to control stimulus-driven interference (for review see Kiesel et al, 2010)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call