Prosser L, Yamaguchi M, Swainson R
Psychol Res. 2022; 87(6):1816-1835.
PMID: 36571593
PMC: 10366292.
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-022-01780-x.
Schliephake A, Bahnmueller J, Willmes K, Koch I, Moeller K
Cogn Process. 2022; 23(2):191-202.
PMID: 35133537
PMC: 9072449.
DOI: 10.1007/s10339-022-01074-5.
Sdoia S, Zivi P, Ferlazzo F
PLoS One. 2020; 15(2):e0228541.
PMID: 32069294
PMC: 7028258.
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228541.
Arabaci G, Parris B
Psychol Res. 2019; 84(8):2090-2110.
PMID: 31250101
PMC: 7515948.
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-019-01214-1.
Eich T, MacKay-Brandt A, Stern Y, Gopher D
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2016; 73(6):954-963.
PMID: 27633612
PMC: 6093327.
DOI: 10.1093/geronb/gbw117.
Attentional updating and monitoring and affective shifting are impacted independently by aging in macaque monkeys.
Gray D, Smith A, Burke S, Gazzaley A, Barnes C
Behav Brain Res. 2016; 322(Pt B):329-338.
PMID: 27368416
PMC: 5493156.
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbr.2016.06.056.
Cue response dissociates inhibitory processes: task identity information is related to backward inhibition but not to competitor rule suppression.
Regev S, Meiran N
Psychol Res. 2016; 81(1):168-181.
PMID: 26762518
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-015-0742-1.
Cue-type manipulation dissociates two types of task set inhibition: backward inhibition and competitor rule suppression.
Regev S, Meiran N
Psychol Res. 2015; 80(4):625-39.
PMID: 25822920
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-015-0663-z.
Competitor rule priming: evidence for priming of task rules in task switching.
Katzir M, Ori B, Hsieh S, Meiran N
Psychol Res. 2014; 79(3):446-62.
PMID: 24947758
DOI: 10.1007/s00426-014-0583-3.
Primed to be inflexible: the influence of set size on cognitive flexibility during childhood.
FitzGibbon L, Cragg L, Carroll D
Front Psychol. 2014; 5:101.
PMID: 24575074
PMC: 3921553.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00101.
An attentional scope model of rumination.
Whitmer A, Gotlib I
Psychol Bull. 2012; 139(5):1036-61.
PMID: 23244316
PMC: 3773498.
DOI: 10.1037/a0030923.
Inhibition, interference, and conflict in task switching.
Costa R, Friedrich F
Psychon Bull Rev. 2012; 19(6):1193-201.
PMID: 22918561
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-012-0311-1.
Sequential modulation of cue use in the task switching paradigm.
Wendt M, Luna-Rodriguez A, Reisenauer R, Jacobsen T, Dreisbach G
Front Psychol. 2012; 3:287.
PMID: 22908004
PMC: 3415689.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00287.
How positive affect modulates proactive control: reduced usage of informative cues under positive affect with low arousal.
Frober K, Dreisbach G
Front Psychol. 2012; 3:265.
PMID: 22866047
PMC: 3406411.
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00265.
Switching and backward inhibition in major depressive disorder: the role of rumination.
Whitmer A, Gotlib I
J Abnorm Psychol. 2012; 121(3):570-8.
PMID: 22468767
PMC: 11877650.
DOI: 10.1037/a0027474.
The influence of distracter and target features on distracter induced blindness.
Michael L, Kiefer M, Niedeggen M
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2012; 8(1):62-9.
PMID: 22419967
PMC: 3303155.
DOI: 10.2478/v10053-008-0103-3.
Deficit in switching between functional brain networks underlies the impact of multitasking on working memory in older adults.
Clapp W, Rubens M, Sabharwal J, Gazzaley A
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011; 108(17):7212-7.
PMID: 21482762
PMC: 3084135.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1015297108.
The role of inhibition in task switching: a review.
Koch I, Gade M, Schuch S, Philipp A
Psychon Bull Rev. 2010; 17(1):1-14.
PMID: 20081154
DOI: 10.3758/PBR.17.1.1.
The representational locus of spatial influence on backward inhibition.
Arbuthnott K
Mem Cognit. 2009; 37(4):522-8.
PMID: 19460958
DOI: 10.3758/MC.37.4.522.
Anticipatory reconfiguration elicited by fully and partially informative cues that validly predict a switch in task.
Karayanidis F, Mansfield E, Galloway K, Smith J, Provost A, Heathcote A
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2009; 9(2):202-15.
PMID: 19403896
DOI: 10.3758/CABN.9.2.202.