Abstract

In task switching, increasing the response–cue interval has been shown to reduce the switch cost. This has been attributed to a time-based decay process influencing the activation of memory representations of tasks (task-sets). Recently, an alternative account based on interference rather than decay has been successfully applied to this data (Horoufchin et al., 2011a). In this account, variation of the RCI is thought to influence the temporal distinctiveness (TD) of episodic traces in memory, thus affecting their retrieval probability. This can affect performance as retrieval probability influences response time: If retrieval succeeds, responding is fast due to positive priming; if retrieval fails, responding is slow, due to having to perform the task via a slow algorithmic process. This account—and a recent formal model (Grange and Cross, 2015)—makes the strong prediction that all RTs are a mixture of one of two processes: a fast process when retrieval succeeds, and a slow process when retrieval fails. The present paper assesses the evidence for this mixture-distribution assumption in TD data. In a first section, statistical evidence for mixture-distributions is found using the fixed-point property test. In a second section, a mathematical process model with mixture-distributions at its core is fitted to the response time distribution data. Both approaches provide good evidence in support of the mixture-distribution assumption, and thus support temporal distinctiveness accounts of the data.

Highlights

  • The task switching paradigm is a popular method for studying cognitive control (Kiesel et al, 2010; Vandierendonck et al, 2010; Grange and Houghton, 2014)

  • The purpose of the present study is to assess in more detail the validity of this key prediction of the temporal distinctiveness account: that intermediate response–cue interval (RCI)-ratio response time (RT) are a mixture of samples from a fast process and a slow process

  • The modeling in this paper presents a “proof of concept” of the mixture-distribution assumption rather than being designed to be a complete explanation of temporal distinctiveness effects in task switching, so the fit can be considered successful in this regard

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The task switching paradigm is a popular method for studying cognitive control (Kiesel et al, 2010; Vandierendonck et al, 2010; Grange and Houghton, 2014). Within this paradigm, participants are required to perform simple cognitive operations on multi-valent stimuli; for example, participants might be presented with numerical stimuli, and be asked to judge either whether the stimulus is odd/even (task A), or whether the stimulus is lower/higher than 5 (task B). Participants know which task to perform as they are presented with a cue informing them which task is relevant for the current trial (e.g., the word “magnitude” might cue the lower/higher task). As the stimulus is usually not informative as to which task needs

Objectives
Methods
Findings
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