Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

High-Level and Low-Level Awareness01:19

High-Level and Low-Level Awareness

Controlled processes in human consciousness represent high-alert mental states where individuals deliberately focus their attention on achieving specific goals. Controlled processes can be seen in situations like mastering new technology, where a person might become so absorbed that they ignore surrounding distractions. Such processes involve selective attention, requiring one to concentrate on particular elements of experience while disregarding others. These are governed by executive...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Mind-wandering content in major depressive disorder: A preregistered secondary analysis.

Journal of affective disorders·2026
Same author

Physiological Evidence for the Time-dependent Resolution of Response Conflicts.

Journal of cognitive neuroscience·2026
Same author

Joint Cognitive Models Reveal Sources of Robust Individual Differences in Conflict Processing.

Computational brain & behavior·2026
Same author

Delayed goal-directed processing underlies inhibitory control challenges in adult ADHD.

Scientific reports·2026
Same author

PupEyes: An interactive Python library for eye movement data processing.

Behavior research methods·2026
Same author

Brain activation during cognitive control tasks differs substantially between people but is reliable within individuals.

Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 15, 2026

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat
09:45

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

Published on: January 23, 2017

Individual differences in multiple types of shifting attention.

Tor D Wager1, John Jonides, Edward E Smith

  • 1Department of Psychology, Columbia University, 1190 Amsterdam Ave., New York, NY 10027, USA. tor@psych.columbia.edu

Memory & Cognition
|May 11, 2007
PubMed
Summary

Switch costs, used to measure executive function, show a common ability for task switching. However, this ability is specific to working memory or perceptual tasks, not general across both.

More Related Videos

The Attentional Set Shifting Task: A Measure of Cognitive Flexibility in Mice
09:15

The Attentional Set Shifting Task: A Measure of Cognitive Flexibility in Mice

Published on: February 4, 2015

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice
08:35

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice

Published on: January 22, 2016

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 15, 2026

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat
09:45

New Variations for Strategy Set-shifting in the Rat

Published on: January 23, 2017

The Attentional Set Shifting Task: A Measure of Cognitive Flexibility in Mice
09:15

The Attentional Set Shifting Task: A Measure of Cognitive Flexibility in Mice

Published on: February 4, 2015

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice
08:35

An Operant Intra-/Extra-dimensional Set-shift Task for Mice

Published on: January 22, 2016

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience

Background:

  • Switch costs are often used to assess executive functions, reflecting the ability to use goal information to guide actions.
  • The commonality of executive functions underlying task set switching across diverse tasks remains understudied.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if switch costs in a novel reaction time task correlate across variations in the locus of representation (perceptual vs. working memory) and judgment task.
  • To determine if a common executive function underlies task set switching across different task types.

Main Methods:

  • Conducted a two-choice reaction time task with 249 participants.
  • Manipulated the locus of representation (perceptual availability vs. working memory storage) and the judgment task.
  • Analyzed switch costs for asymmetry and correlation across task variations.

Main Results:

  • Switch costs were asymmetrical, influenced by task difficulty and processing speed.
  • After controlling for task difficulty and speed, a common ability for task set preparation and response selection was found.
  • Residual shift costs, related only to response selection, did not correlate across tasks.
  • Switch costs correlated more highly within task types (working memory or perceptual), suggesting unique processes for each.

Conclusions:

  • Executive function is not a single entity; task switching abilities are partially domain-specific.
  • Factors like task difficulty and processing speed must be considered when measuring individual differences in switch costs.
  • Future research should explore the distinct neural mechanisms underlying working memory and perceptual task switching.