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

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Stimuli with a positive valence can facilitate cognitive control.

Memory & cognition·2021
Same author

Perceived conflict may be negative but resolved conflict is not.

Brain and cognition·2021
Same author

Cognitively demanding stimuli can acquire positive valence.

Psychological research·2021
Same author

Neutral but not in the middle: cross-cultural comparisons of negative bias of "neutral" emotional stimuli.

Cognition & emotion·2020
Same author

Assessing and overcoming participant dishonesty in online data collection.

Behavior research methods·2017
Same author

The effects of increased serving sizes on consumption.

Appetite·2016

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Measuring the Switch Cost of Smartphone Use While Walking
07:00

Measuring the Switch Cost of Smartphone Use While Walking

Published on: April 30, 2020

Dissociating the components of switch cost using two-to-two cue-task mapping.

Chris Hydock1, Myeong-Ho Sohn

  • 1Department of Psychology, George Washington University, DC, USA. chydock@gwmail.gwu.edu

Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance
|April 6, 2011
PubMed
Summary

Switching tasks incurs a cost, even without changing cues. This study shows task execution itself drives performance deficits, independent of cue changes in task switching.

More Related Videos

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
07:52

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen

Published on: October 5, 2020

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking
05:58

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Published on: August 29, 2018

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jun 3, 2026

Measuring the Switch Cost of Smartphone Use While Walking
07:00

Measuring the Switch Cost of Smartphone Use While Walking

Published on: April 30, 2020

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
07:52

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen

Published on: October 5, 2020

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking
05:58

Using Rapid Serial Visual Presentation to Measure Set-Specific Capture, a Consequence of Distraction While Multitasking

Published on: August 29, 2018

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human Performance

Background:

  • Task switching research often links performance deficits to cue changes.
  • The role of cue changes versus task execution in task switch costs is debated.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To disentangle the effects of cue changes from task execution on task switch costs.
  • To investigate the independent contribution of task execution to performance deficits during task switching.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized a 2:2 cue-task mapping where each cue signaled two distinct tasks.
  • Manipulated cue presentation (advance vs. no advance) to isolate cue change effects.
  • Analyzed performance costs under different cueing conditions and transition frequencies.

Main Results:

  • Advance cue presentation eliminated cue-related costs, but task switch costs persisted.
  • The relative impact of task switch and cue change costs varied with transition frequencies when cues were not advanced.
  • Task execution demonstrated a significant contribution to switch costs, separate from cue alterations.

Conclusions:

  • Task execution is a key factor contributing to task switch costs, independent of cue changes.
  • Findings challenge the notion that cue changes solely explain performance deficits in task switching.
  • Task switching involves cognitive processes inherent to task execution itself.