Using advance information in dynamic cognitive control: An ERP study of task-switching

Ensuring that behavior remains appropriate over time requires dynamic, flexible control. We used the task-switching procedure to investigate the mechanisms whereby advance information is used to control behavior under conditions of frequently changing task-rules. The color of target stimuli signaled which task-set (or behavioral 'rule') was required on each trial. We provided different forms of advance information in two conditions and found a double dissociation in their effects: visual precues ('precueing') facilitated task-switching, whereas a fixed task-sequence ('predictability') facilitated task-repetition. In addition, precueing was associated with a late parietal positive ERP which preceded target onset, whereas predictability produced an increase in the target-locked centro-parietal P3b ERP. We suggest that these results indicate the activity of two distinct mechanisms. The first, driven by a task-cue and indexed by the late parietal positivity, may drive efficient task-performance on precued switch trials but occurs too late on non-precued switch trials to index an anticipatory task-set reconfiguration process. The second may constitute active consolidation or maintenance of a particular task-set which occurs at least one trial ahead, when task-repetitions are predictable, and results in facilitation of target stimulus evaluation.

[1]  Francisco Barceló,et al.  Attentional set shifting modulates the target P3b Response in the Wisconsin card sorting test , 2000, Neuropsychologia.

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

[3]  Francisco Barceló,et al.  Spatiotemporal brain dynamics during preparatory set shifting: MEG evidence , 2004, NeuroImage.

[4]  Matthew F. S. Rushworth,et al.  Components of Switching Intentional Set , 2002, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[5]  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.

[6]  T. Shallice,et al.  Task Switching : A PDP Model , 2001 .

[7]  Michael D. Rugg,et al.  An event-related potential study of the effects of within- and across-modality word repetition , 1993 .

[8]  M. Coltheart,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of anticipatory and poststimulus components of task switching. , 2003, Psychophysiology.

[9]  R De Jong,et al.  An intention-activation account of residual switch costs , 2000 .

[10]  Myeong-Ho Sohn,et al.  Effects of repetition and foreknowledge in task-set reconfiguration. , 2000 .

[11]  David E. Meyer,et al.  Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. , 2001 .

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

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

[14]  R. Cunnington,et al.  ERP correlates of executive control during repeated language switching , 2001 .

[15]  Iring Koch,et al.  Sequential task predictability in task switching , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[16]  John J. Foxe,et al.  Task switching: a high-density electrical mapping study , 2003, NeuroImage.

[17]  R. Cunnington,et al.  ERP Correlates of a Receptive Language-Switching Task , 2004, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[18]  C. Rorden,et al.  Cognitive Control Mechanisms Revealed by ERP and fMRI: Evidence from Repeated Task-Switching , 2003, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

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

[20]  S. Nieuwenhuis,et al.  Mental fatigue and task control: planning and preparation. , 2000, Psychophysiology.

[21]  E Ruthruff,et al.  Switching between simple cognitive tasks: the interaction of top-down and bottom-up factors. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  F. Barceló.  The Madrid card sorting test (MCST): a task switching paradigm to study executive attention with event-related potentials. , 2003, Brain research. Brain research protocols.

[23]  S. Hsieh,et al.  Switching between simple response-sets: inferences from the lateralized readiness potential. , 2003, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[24]  G. Wylie,et al.  Task-switching: Positive and negative priming of task-set. , 1999 .

[25]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Electrophysiological correlates of anticipatory task-switching processes. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[26]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Attention to Action , 1986 .

[27]  M. Posner,et al.  Spatiotemporal analysis of brain electrical fields , 1994 .

[28]  Paul D. Kieffaber,et al.  Event-related potential correlates of task switching and switch costs. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[29]  I Koch,et al.  Automatic and intentional activation of task sets. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

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

[31]  A. Treisman,et al.  Attention, Space, and Action: Studies in Cognitive Neuroscience , 2001 .

[32]  Iring Koch,et al.  Inhibition of response mode in task switching. , 2004, Experimental psychology.

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

[34]  A. Kok.  On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. , 2001, Psychophysiology.