Task switching: effects of practice on switch and mixing costs

In the task-switching paradigm, mixing costs indicate the performance costs to mix two different tasks, while switch costs indicate the performance costs to switch between two sequentially presented tasks. Applying tasks with bivalent stimuli and responses, many studies demonstrated substantial mixing and switch costs and a reduction of these costs as a result of practice. The present study investigates whether extensive practice of a task-switching situation including tasks with univalent stimuli eliminates these costs. Participants practiced switching between a visual and an auditory task. These tasks were chosen because they had shown eliminated performance costs in a comparable dual-task practice study (Schumacher et al. Psychol Sci 12:101–108, 2001). Participants either performed the tasks with univalent responses (i.e., visual-manual and auditory-verbal stimulus–response mappings) or bivalent responses (i.e., visual-manual and auditory-manual stimulus–response mappings). Both valence conditions revealed substantial mixing and switch costs at the beginning of practice, yet, mixing costs were largely eliminated after eight practice sessions while switch costs were still existent.

[1]  Richard B. Ivry,et al.  Task switching and multitask performance. , 2000 .

[2]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Control and interference in task switching--a review. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  S. Monsell Task switching , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  A. Kramer,et al.  Changes in executive control across the life span: examination of task-switching performance. , 2001, Developmental psychology.

[5]  E. M. Altmann,et al.  The preparation effect in task switching: Carryover of SOA , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[6]  S. Monsell Task-set reconfiguration processes do not imply a control homunuculus: Reply to Altmann , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[7]  Nachshon Meiran,et al.  Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching , 2000 .

[8]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Switching of Response Modalities , 2005, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[9]  Pierre Jolicoeur,et al.  Virtually no evidence for virtually perfect time-sharing. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  H. Hughes,et al.  On the minimization of task switch costs following long-term training , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[11]  Addie Dutta Experimental RunTime System: Software for developing and running reaction time experiments on IBM-compatible PCs , 1995 .

[12]  M. Schmitter-Edgecombe,et al.  Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks following severe closed-head injury. , 2006, Neuropsychology.

[13]  B. Eppinger,et al.  Effects of associative learning on age differences in task-set switching. , 2006, Acta psychologica.

[14]  H. Pashler Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Practice-related reduction of dual-task costs under conditions of a manual-pedal response combination , 2011 .

[16]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Improved Intertask Coordination after Extensive Dual-Task Practice , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  Marco Steinhauser,et al.  Mixing costs in task shifting reflect sequential processing stages in a multicomponent task , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[18]  U. Lindenberger,et al.  Adult age differences in task switching. , 2000, Psychology and aging.

[19]  David E. Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. , 1997 .

[20]  Mike Wendt,et al.  The impact of stimulus-specific practice and task instructions on response congruency effects between tasks , 2008, Psychological research.

[21]  N. Meiran,et al.  On the origins of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  A. Allport,et al.  Cue-based preparation and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching , 2006, Memory & cognition.

[23]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Involuntary retrieval in alphabet-arithmetic tasks: Task-mixing and task-switching costs , 2005, Psychological research.

[24]  S. Monsell,et al.  Costs of a predictible switch between simple cognitive tasks. , 1995 .

[25]  D. Alan Allport,et al.  SHIFTING INTENTIONAL SET - EXPLORING THE DYNAMIC CONTROL OF TASKS , 1994 .

[26]  D. A. Taylor,et al.  The cuing and priming of cognitive operations. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[27]  D E Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. , 1997, Psychological review.

[28]  M. Moscovitch,et al.  Attention and Performance 15: Conscious and Nonconscious Information Processing , 1994 .

[29]  Joachim Hoffmann,et al.  Task switches under Go/NoGo conditions and the decomposition of switch costs , 2003 .

[30]  D. Meyer,et al.  Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[31]  H. Zimmer,et al.  Cognitive Science 2007 : Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society of Germany , 2008 .

[32]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Processing differences between simple and choice reactions affect bottleneck localization in overlapping tasks , 1999 .

[33]  U. Mayr Age differences in the selection of mental sets: the role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. , 2001, Psychology and aging.

[34]  J. Driver,et al.  Control of Cognitive Processes: Attention and Performance XVIII , 2000 .

[35]  J. Kray,et al.  How useful is executive control training? Age differences in near and far transfer of task-switching training. , 2009, Developmental science.

[36]  N. Yeung,et al.  Switching between tasks of unequal familiarity: the role of stimulus-attribute and response-set selection. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[37]  S. Keele,et al.  Changing internal constraints on action: the role of backward inhibition. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[38]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Integration, automatization, or just stage-shortening? , 2006, Psychological research.

[39]  T Kleinsorge,et al.  Response repetition benefits and costs. , 1999, Acta psychologica.

[40]  Jennifer M. Glass,et al.  Virtually Perfect Time Sharing in Dual-Task Performance: Uncorking the Central Cognitive Bottleneck , 2001, Psychological science.

[41]  Eric Ruthruff,et al.  Bypassing the central bottleneck after single-task practice in the psychological refractory period paradigm: Evidence for task automatization and greedy resource recruitment , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[42]  A. Kiesel,et al.  Task switching: on the origin of response congruency effects , 2007, Psychological research.

[43]  Eliot Hazeltine,et al.  Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection after practice. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  U. Mayr Age differences in the selection of mental sets: the role of inhibition, stimulus ambiguity, and response-set overlap. , 2001, Psychology and aging.