» Articles » PMID: 12199214

Sequential Effects in Auditory Choice Reaction Time Tasks

Overview
Specialty Psychology
Date 2002 Aug 30
PMID 12199214
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This paper concerns sequential effects in choice reaction time tasks. Performance in two interleaved auditory tasks was examined, and two general types of sequential effects were revealed. First, a response repetition effect occurred: Subjects were facilitated in responding when both the stimulus and the response were immediately repeated. Generally, it appeared that subjects were operating according to the bypass rule--that is, repeat the response if the stimulus or some aspect thereof is repeated from the preceding trial; otherwise, change the response. In addition, the experiment also revealed a second type of sequential effect, known as a task-switching effect Subjects were overall slower to respond when the task changed between adjacent trials than when there was no task change. A final result was that subjects were markedly impaired when the stimulus changed but the same response had to be repeated. This finding has been reported elsewhere when purely visual tasks have been used. Hence, it seems that particular difficulties arise, in such sequential testing situations, when type-distinct stimuli are grouped into the same response categories.

Citing Articles

Distraction by unexpected sounds: comparing response repetition and response switching.

Garcia-Lopez E, Parmentier F Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1451008.

PMID: 39417033 PMC: 11480036. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1451008.


Response-repetition costs in task switching do not index a simple response-switch bias: Evidence from manipulating the number of response alternatives.

Koch I, Hazeltine E, Petersen G, Weissman D Atten Percept Psychophys. 2023; 85(8):2577-2587.

PMID: 37147509 PMC: 10600293. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-023-02708-2.


It all sounds the same to me: sequential ERP and behavioral effects during pitch and harmonicity judgments.

Dyson B, Alain C Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2008; 8(3):329-43.

PMID: 18814469 DOI: 10.3758/cabn.8.3.329.


Response execution, selection, or activation: what is sufficient for response-related repetition effects under task shifting?.

Hubner R, Druey M Psychol Res. 2005; 70(4):245-61.

PMID: 16151720 DOI: 10.1007/s00426-005-0219-8.


Inhibition of action rules.

Mayr U Psychon Bull Rev. 2002; 9(1):93-9.

PMID: 12026957 DOI: 10.3758/bf03196261.

References
1.
Fletcher B, Rabbitt P . The changing pattern of perceptual analytic strategies and response selection with practice in a two-choice reaction time task. Q J Exp Psychol. 1978; 30(3):417-27. DOI: 10.1080/00335557843000025. View

2.
MUDD S . SPATIAL STEREOTYPES OF FOUR DIMENSIONS OF PURE TONE. J Exp Psychol. 1963; 66:347-52. DOI: 10.1037/h0040045. View

3.
Smith M . Repetition effect and short-term memory. J Exp Psychol. 1968; 77(3):435-9. DOI: 10.1037/h0021293. View

4.
Terry K, Valdes L, Neill W . Does "inhibition of return" occur in discrimination tasks?. Percept Psychophys. 1994; 55(3):279-86. DOI: 10.3758/bf03207599. View

5.
Reuter-Lorenz P, Jha A, Rosenquist J . What is inhibited in inhibition of return?. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996; 22(2):367-78. DOI: 10.1037//0096-1523.22.2.367. View