On the role of verbalization during task set selection: switching or serial order control?

Recent task-switching work in which paper-and-pencil administered single-task lists were compared with task-alternation lists has demonstrated large increases in task-switch costs with concurrent articulatory suppression (AS), implicating a crucial role for verbalization during switching (Baddeley, Chincotta, & Adlam, 2001; Emerson & Miyake, 2003). Experiment 1 replicated this result, using computerized assessment, albeit with much smaller effect sizes than in the original reports. In Experiment 2, AS interference was reduced when a sequential cue (spatial location) that indicated the current position in the sequence of task alternations was given. Finally, in Experiment 3, switch trials and no-switch trials were compared within a block of alternating runs of two tasks. Again, AS interference was obtained mainly when the endogenous sequencing demand was high, and it was comparable for no-switch and switch trials. These results suggest that verbalization may be critical for endogenous maintenance and updating of a sequential plan, rather than exclusively for the actual switching process.