Abstract
Participants switched frequently between high/low and odd/even classification of a digit. The interval between a task cue and the next digit varied between blocks. In Experiment 1, the task switched predictably every two, four, or eight trials. In Experiment 2, switching predictably every four trials was compared with random switching. With predictable switching, the cost was limited to the first trial of a run. Random switching produced a more gradual approach to asymptotic performance. After one performance, control processes attenuate the resulting change in task-set bias if a further switch is likely, but this strategic modulation is soon overwhelmed by task-set priming through further performances. Preparation reduced switch costs but not interference from the irrelevant attribute: Control of interference appears to be reactive, not proactive. Switch costs did not increase with run length, suggesting that retrieval of the task set last associated with the stimulus did not contribute to switch costs.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
