The surface structure and the deep structure of sequential control: what can we learn from task span switch costs?

Area of Science:

• Cognitive Psychology
• Neuroscience

Background:

• Task-switching paradigms often conflate cue-specific and task-specific costs.
• Existing research suggests response time costs may stem from passive priming rather than active control.

Purpose of the Study:

• To disentangle cue-switch costs from true task-switch costs.
• To investigate endogenous control mechanisms in task selection.
• To examine the role of preparation in cue- and task-switching.

Main Methods:

• Utilized a task span procedure with a 2:1 cue-task mapping.
• Separated cue-switch costs from task-switch costs.
• Manipulated opportunities for preparation between trials.

Main Results:

• Substantial cue-switch costs and task-switch costs were observed.
• Cue-switch costs, unlike task-switch costs, were sensitive to preparation.
• Simple action plans appear to lack task-specific information.

Conclusions:

• The distinction between cue-related and task-related processes is fundamental in task switching.
• Both exogenous and endogenous cueing involve separable cue and task components.
• Cognitive control in task switching relies on differentiating these components.