When Predictions Take Control: The Effect of Task Predictions on Task Switching Performance

In this paper, we aimed to investigate the role of self-generated predictions in the flexible control of behavior. Therefore, we ran a task switching experiment in which participants were asked to try to predict the upcoming task in three conditions varying in switch rate (30, 50, and 70%). Irrespective of their predictions, the color of the target indicated which task participants had to perform. In line with previous studies (Mayr, 2006; Monsell and Mizon, 2006), the switch cost was attenuated as the switch rate increased. Importantly, a clear task repetition bias was found in all conditions, yet the task repetition prediction rate dropped from 78 over 66 to 49% with increasing switch probability in the three conditions. Irrespective of condition, the switch cost was strongly reduced in expectation of a task alternation compared to the cost of an unexpected task alternation following repetition predictions. Hence, our data suggest that the reduction in the switch cost with increasing switch probability is caused by a diminished expectancy for the task to repeat. Taken together, this paper highlights the importance of predictions in the flexible control of behavior, and suggests a crucial role for task repetition expectancy in the context-sensitive adjusting of task switching performance.

[1]  Ardi Roelofs,et al.  Attentional Control in Anterior Cingulate Cortex Based on Probabilistic Cueing , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[2]  Catherine M Arrington,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article The Cost of a Voluntary Task Switch , 2022 .

[3]  W. Gaissmaier,et al.  The smart potential behind probability matching , 2008, Cognition.

[4]  R. Nickerson,et al.  The production and perception of randomness. , 2002, Psychological review.

[5]  Frederick Verbruggen,et al.  Tscope: A C library for programming cognitive experiments on the MS Windows platform , 2006, Behavior research methods.

[6]  W. Neill,et al.  Decision processes in selective attention: Response priming in the Stroop color-word task , 1978, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  S. Holm.  A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[8]  Darryl W. Schneider,et al.  Priming cue encoding by manipulating transition frequency in explicitly cued task switching. , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[9]  Marcel Brass,et al.  Cue-switch effects do not rely on the same neural systems as task-switch effects , 2011, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[10]  W. Notebaert,et al.  Hebbian learning of cognitive control: dealing with specific and nonspecific adaptation. , 2008, Psychological review.

[11]  Peter Ayton,et al.  The hot hand fallacy and the gambler’s fallacy: Two faces of subjective randomness? , 2004, Memory & cognition.

[12]  Yaakov Kareev,et al.  Positive bias in the perception of covariation. , 1995 .

[13]  Massimo Silvetti,et al.  Value and Prediction Error in Medial Frontal Cortex: Integrating the Single-Unit and Systems Levels of Analysis , 2011, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[14]  Ulrich Mayr,et al.  What matters in the cued task-switching paradigm: Tasks or cues? , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[15]  Colin M. Macleod.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review. , 1991, Psychological bulletin.

[16]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[17]  M. Brass,et al.  Decomposing Components of Task Preparation with Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  Gordon D Logan,et al.  Task-switching performance with 1:1 and 2:1 cue-task mappings: not so different after all. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  Stephen Monsell,et al.  Task-set reconfiguration with predictable and unpredictable task switches , 2003, Memory & cognition.

[20]  Cédric A. Bouquet,et al.  Adjustments of task-set control processes: Effect of task switch frequency on task-mixing and task-switching costs , 2011 .

[21]  R. Kliegl,et al.  Differential effects of cue changes and task changes on task-set selection costs. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[22]  T. Goschke.  Intentional reconfiguration and involuntary persistence in task-set switching , 2000 .

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

[24]  The role of response repetition in task switching. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  Roy D. Patterson,et al.  Predictive Coding and Pitch Processing in the Auditory Cortex , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  M. Bar.  The proactive brain: using analogies and associations to generate predictions , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  G D Logan,et al.  Constraints on strategy construction in a speeded discrimination task. , 1982, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  L. Jiménez,et al.  It is not what you expect: dissociating conflict adaptation from expectancies in a Stroop task. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[29]  Wim Notebaert,et al.  Adaptation by binding: a learning account of cognitive control , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[30]  N. Harvey.  The Stroop Effect: Failure to Focus Attention or Failure to Maintain Focusing? , 1984 .

[31]  Anna Christina Nobre,et al.  Anticipating Conflict Facilitates Controlled Stimulus-response Selection , 2009, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[32]  Joshua W. Brown,et al.  Medial prefrontal cortex as an action-outcome predictor , 2011, Nature Neuroscience.

[33]  E. Soetens,et al.  Expectancy or Automatic Facilitation? Separating Sequential Effects in Two-Choice Reaction Time , 1985 .

[34]  R. Remington.  Analysis of sequential effects in choice reaction times. , 1969, Journal of experimental psychology.

[35]  H. Haider,et al.  Preparatory processes in the task-switching paradigm: evidence from the use of probability cues. , 2002 .

[36]  Wim Notebaert,et al.  Conflict adaptation: It is not what you expect , 2012, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[37]  Marcel Brass,et al.  Challenging a decade of brain research on task switching: Brain activation in the task‐switching paradigm reflects adaptation rather than reconfiguration of task sets , 2012, Human brain mapping.

[38]  Stephen Monsell,et al.  Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process? , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[39]  Elizabeth C. Hirschman,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[40]  T. Egner.  Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control , 2007, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

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

[42]  W. Kunde,et al.  Precueing spatial S-R correspondence: is there regulation of expected response conflict? , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[43]  G. Logan,et al.  Clever homunculus: is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task-cuing procedure? , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  G. Logan,et al.  When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task , 1979 .

[45]  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.

[46]  E. Donchin,et al.  Optimizing the use of information: strategic control of activation of responses. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[47]  N. Meiran.  Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. , 1996 .

[48]  C. Summerfield,et al.  Expectation (and attention) in visual cognition , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[49]  Christina Zelano,et al.  Olfactory Predictive Codes and Stimulus Templates in Piriform Cortex , 2011, Neuron.

[50]  N. Meiran,et al.  Component Processes in Task Switching , 2000, Cognitive Psychology.

[51]  I. Koch.  The role of external cues for endogenous advance reconfiguration in task switching , 2003, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[52]  Hilde Haider,et al.  Preparatory processes in the task-switching paradigm: evidence from the use of probability cues. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.