Is task switching nothing but cue priming? Evidence from ERPs

117Citations
Citations of this article
110Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Recent findings suggesting that switch costs in the task-cuing paradigm are largely attributable to a change in the task-indicating cue have been interpreted in terms of a priming model of task-switch costs (Logan & Bundesen, 2003). According to this explanation, participants do not actually switch task sets, but merely use a cue-stimulus compound to disambiguate competing response tendencies associated with bivalent stimuli. Here, we report an event-related potential (ERP) experiment that provides evidence against this notion. In a paradigm with a 2:1 mapping between cues and tasks, we show that cue-switch and task-switch effects are dissociable on a neurophysiological level, indicating that task switching is more than a switch in the task-indicating cue. Moreover, a systematic analysis of the ERPs during the cue-stimulus interval suggests that updating processes can run in advance, before the stimulus is presented. Copyright 2008 Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jost, K., Mayr, U., & Rösler, F. (2008). Is task switching nothing but cue priming? Evidence from ERPs. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.8.1.74

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free