» Articles » PMID: 19744942

Verbal Representation in Task Order Control: an Examination with Transition and Task Cues in Random Task Switching

Overview
Journal Mem Cognit
Specialty Psychology
Date 2009 Sep 12
PMID 19744942
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Recent task-switching studies in which a predictable task sequence has been used have indicated that verbal representation contributes to the control of task order information. The present study focused on the role of verbal representation in sequential task decisions, which are an important part of task order control, and examined the effects of articulatory suppression in a random-task-cuing paradigm with two different types of cues presented just before the presentation of a stimulus: a transition cue and a task cue. The former cue provided information only about switching or repeating the task, whereas the latter was associated directly with the identity of the task (i.e., indicating a parity or a magnitude task). In Experiment 1, in which transition cues guided task sequences, articulatory suppression impaired performance in both repetition and switch trials, thereby increasing the mixing costs. In Experiment 2, in which a task cue, rather than a transition cue, was presented to examine the influence of a cue-decoding process, articulatory suppression had no specific effect on task performance. Experiment 3, in which the transition cue and the task cue were randomly presented in the same block to equalize the memory load and task strategy for the two types of cues, confirmed that articulatory suppression significantly increased the mixing costs only in transition cue trials. The results from the three experiments indicated that the use of verbal representation is effective in sequential task decision-that is, in selecting a task set on the basis of transient task order information in both repetition and switch trials.

Citing Articles

Working memory training in autism: Near and far transfer.

Sedjari S, El-Mir M, Souirti Z Tunis Med. 2024; 101(12):884-890.

PMID: 38477195 PMC: 11261524.


Task switching involves working memory: Evidence from neural representation.

Wang Y, Zhou X, Peng X, Hu X Front Psychol. 2022; 13:1003298.

PMID: 36457903 PMC: 9706182. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1003298.


Investigating the impact of dynamic and static secondary tasks on task-switch cost.

Gade M, Friedrich K, Koch I Mem Cognit. 2018; 47(2):240-256.

PMID: 30430391 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-018-0862-0.


Making Sense of Self Talk.

Geurts B Rev Philos Psychol. 2018; 9(2):271-285.

PMID: 29904435 PMC: 5986836. DOI: 10.1007/s13164-017-0375-y.


General Slowing and Education Mediate Task Switching Performance Across the Life-Span.

Moretti L, Semenza C, Vallesi A Front Psychol. 2018; 9:630.

PMID: 29780341 PMC: 5945925. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00630.


References
1.
Rubin O, Meiran N . On the origins of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006; 31(6):1477-91. DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1477. View

2.
Logan G, Bundesen C . Very clever homunculus: compound stimulus strategies for the explicit task-cuing procedure. Psychon Bull Rev. 2005; 11(5):832-40. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196709. View

3.
Baddeley A, Chincotta D, Adlam A . Working memory and the control of action: evidence from task switching. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2002; 130(4):641-57. View

4.
Miyake A, Emerson M, Padilla F, Ahn J . Inner speech as a retrieval aid for task goals: the effects of cue type and articulatory suppression in the random task cuing paradigm. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2004; 115(2-3):123-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.12.004. View

5.
Kray J, Lindenberger U . Adult age differences in task switching. Psychol Aging. 2001; 15(1):126-47. DOI: 10.1037//0882-7974.15.1.126. View