Task-switching Processes Research Articles

Age equivalence in switch costs for prosaccade and antisaccade tasks.

This study examined age differences in task switching using prosaccade and antisaccade tasks. Significant specific and general switch costs were found for both young and old adults, suggesting the existence of 2 types of processes: those responsible for activation of the currently relevant task set and deactivation of the previously relevant task set and those responsible for maintaining more than 1 task active in working memory. Contrary to the findings of previous research, which used manual response tasks with arbitrary stimulus-response mappings to study task-switching performance, no age-related deficits in either type of switch costs were found. These data suggest age-related sparing of task-switching processes in situations in which memory load is low and stimulus-response mappings are well learned.

Task switching: a high-density electrical mapping study

Flexibly switching between tasks is one of the paradigmatic functions of so-called “executive control” processes. Neuroimaging studies have implicated both prefrontal and parietal cortical regions in the processing necessary to effectively switch task. Beyond their general involvement in this critical function, however, little is known about the dynamics of processing across frontal and parietal regions. For instance, it remains to be determined to what extent these areas play a role in preparing to switch task before arrival of the stimulus to be acted upon and to what extent they play a role in any switching processes that occur after the stimulus is presented. Here, we used the excellent temporal resolution afforded by high-density mapping of brain potentials to explore the time course of the processes underlying (1) the performance of and (2) the preparation for a switch of task. We detail the contributions of both frontal and parietal processes to these two aspects of the task-switching process. Our data revealed a complex pattern of effects. Most striking was a period of sustained activity over bilateral parietal regions preceding the switch trial. Over frontal regions, activity actually decreased during this same period. Strongest sustained frontal activity was in fact seen for trials on which no switch was required. Further, we find that the first differential activity associated with switching task was over posterior parietal areas (220 ms), whereas over frontal scalp, the first differential activity is found more than 200 ms later. These and other effects are interpreted in terms of a “competition” model in which preparing to switch task is understood as the beginning of a competition between the potentially relevant tasks that is resolved during the switch trial. Our findings are difficult to account for with models that posit a strong role for frontal cortical regions in “reconfiguring” the system during switches of task.

Task switching: a high-density electrical mapping study

Flexibly switching between tasks is one of the paradigmatic functions of so-called “executive control” processes. Neuroimaging studies have implicated both prefrontal and parietal cortical regions in the processing necessary to effectively switch task. Beyond their general involvement in this critical function, however, little is known about the dynamics of processing across frontal and parietal regions. For instance, it remains to be determined to what extent these areas play a role in preparing to switch task before arrival of the stimulus to be acted upon and to what extent they play a role in any switching processes that occur after the stimulus is presented. Here, we used the excellent temporal resolution afforded by high-density mapping of brain potentials to explore the time course of the processes underlying (1) the performance of and (2) the preparation for a switch of task. We detail the contributions of both frontal and parietal processes to these two aspects of the task-switching process. Our data revealed a complex pattern of effects. Most striking was a period of sustained activity over bilateral parietal regions preceding the switch trial. Over frontal regions, activity actually decreased during this same period. Strongest sustained frontal activity was in fact seen for trials on which no switch was required. Further, we find that the first differential activity associated with switching task was over posterior parietal areas (220 ms), whereas over frontal scalp, the first differential activity is found more than 200 ms later. These and other effects are interpreted in terms of a “competition” model in which preparing to switch task is understood as the beginning of a competition between the potentially relevant tasks that is resolved during the switch trial. Our findings are difficult to account for with models that posit a strong role for frontal cortical regions in “reconfiguring” the system during switches of task.

Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs.

A task-switching paradigm with a 2:1 mapping between cues and tasks was used to separate cue-switching processes (indexed through pure cue-switch costs) from actual task-switching processes (indexed through additional costs in case of cue and task changes). A large portion of total switch costs was due to cue changes (Experiments 1 and 2), and cue-switch costs but not task-switch costs were sensitive to effects of practice (Experiment 1) and preparation (Experiment 2). In contrast, task-switch costs were particularly sensitive to response-priming effects (Experiments 1 and 2) and task-set inhibition (Experiment 3). Results suggest two processing stages relevant during task-set selection: cue-driven retrieval of task rules from long-term memory and the automatic application of rules to a particular stimulus situation.

Task-switching and memory retrieval processing: Electrophysiological evidence

Participants attempted to retrieve phonological or imagery-based information under conditions where either the two kinds of retrieval were required in separate blocks, or where frequent switches between retrieval tasks were required within blocks. Electrophysiological indices of processes engaged in pursuit of accurate memory judgments, elicited by contrasting ERPs evoked by correctly identified new test items, differed according to retrieval task only when the tasks were completed in separate blocks. The principal conclusion suggested by these findings is that the requirement to alternate frequently between the two retrieval tasks attenuated the engagement of task-specific processes that form part of a retrieval attempt.

Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching.

Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching.

Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching.

In 4 experiments, participants alternated between different tasks or performed the same task repeatedly. The tasks for 2 of the experiments required responding to geometric objects in terms of alternative classification rules, and the tasks for the other 2 experiments required solving arithmetic problems in terms of alternative numerical operations. Performance was measured as a function of whether the tasks were familiar or unfamiliar, the rules were simple or complex, and visual cues were present or absent about which tasks should be performed. Task alternation yielded switching-time costs that increased with rule complexity but decreased with task cuing. These factor effects were additive, supporting a model of executive control that has goal-shifting and rule-activation stages for task switching. It appears that rule activation takes more time for switching from familiar to unfamiliar tasks than for switching in the opposite direction.

Component Processes in Task Switching

Participants switched between two randomly ordered, two-choice reaction-time (RT) tasks, where an instructional cue preceded the target stimulus and indicated which task to execute. Task-switching cost dissipated passively while the participants waited for the instructional cue in order to know which task to execute (during the Response–Cue Interval). Switching cost was sharply reduced, but not abolished, when the participants actively prepared for the task switch in response to the instructional cue (during the Cue–Target Interval). The preparation for a task switch has shown not to be a by-product of general preparation by phasic alertness or predicting target onset. It is suggested that task-switching cost has at least three components reflecting (1) the passive dissipation of the previous task set, (2) the preparation of the new task set, and (3) a residual component.