Reconfiguration of task-set: Is it easier to switch to the weaker task?

Stephen Monsell, Nick Yeung, Rayna Azuma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

198 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Switching between two tasks afforded by the same stimuli results in slower reactions and more errors on the first stimulus after the task changes. This "switch cost" is reduced, but not usually eliminated, by the opportunity to prepare for a task switch. While there is agreement that this preparation effect indexes a control process performed before the stimulus, the "residual" cost has been attributed to several sources: to a control process essential for task-set reconfiguration that can be carried out only after the stimulus onset, to probabilistic failure to engage in preparation prior to the stimulus, and to two kinds of priming from previous trials: positive priming of the now-irrelevant task set and inhibition of the now-relevant task-set. The main evidence for the carry-over of inhibition is the observation that it is easier to switch from the stronger to the weaker of a pair of tasks afforded by the stimulus than vice versa. We survey available data on interactions between task switching and three manipulations of relative task strength: pre-experimental experience, stimulus-response compatibility, and intra-experimental practice. We conclude that it is far from universally true that it is easier to switch to the weaker task. Either inhibition of the stronger task-set is a strategy used only in the special case of extreme inequality in strength, or its consequences for later performance may be masked by slower post-stimulus control operations for more complex tasks. Inhibitory priming may also be stimulus specific.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)250-264
Number of pages15
JournalPsychological Research
Volume63
Issue number3-4
Publication statusPublished - 2000 Aug
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Costs and Cost Analysis
Stimulus
Surveys and Questionnaires
Priming

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychology(all)
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Cite this

Reconfiguration of task-set : Is it easier to switch to the weaker task? / Monsell, Stephen; Yeung, Nick; Azuma, Rayna.

In: Psychological Research, Vol. 63, No. 3-4, 08.2000, p. 250-264.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Monsell, Stephen ; Yeung, Nick ; Azuma, Rayna. / Reconfiguration of task-set : Is it easier to switch to the weaker task?. In: Psychological Research. 2000 ; Vol. 63, No. 3-4. pp. 250-264.
@article{c4d460107a69491d8704a47c3b5fe66d,
title = "Reconfiguration of task-set: Is it easier to switch to the weaker task?",
abstract = "Switching between two tasks afforded by the same stimuli results in slower reactions and more errors on the first stimulus after the task changes. This {"}switch cost{"} is reduced, but not usually eliminated, by the opportunity to prepare for a task switch. While there is agreement that this preparation effect indexes a control process performed before the stimulus, the {"}residual{"} cost has been attributed to several sources: to a control process essential for task-set reconfiguration that can be carried out only after the stimulus onset, to probabilistic failure to engage in preparation prior to the stimulus, and to two kinds of priming from previous trials: positive priming of the now-irrelevant task set and inhibition of the now-relevant task-set. The main evidence for the carry-over of inhibition is the observation that it is easier to switch from the stronger to the weaker of a pair of tasks afforded by the stimulus than vice versa. We survey available data on interactions between task switching and three manipulations of relative task strength: pre-experimental experience, stimulus-response compatibility, and intra-experimental practice. We conclude that it is far from universally true that it is easier to switch to the weaker task. Either inhibition of the stronger task-set is a strategy used only in the special case of extreme inequality in strength, or its consequences for later performance may be masked by slower post-stimulus control operations for more complex tasks. Inhibitory priming may also be stimulus specific.",
author = "Stephen Monsell and Nick Yeung and Rayna Azuma",
year = "2000",
month = "8",
language = "English",
volume = "63",
pages = "250--264",
journal = "Psychological Research",
issn = "0340-0727",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "3-4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reconfiguration of task-set

T2 - Is it easier to switch to the weaker task?

AU - Monsell, Stephen

AU - Yeung, Nick

AU - Azuma, Rayna

PY - 2000/8

Y1 - 2000/8

N2 - Switching between two tasks afforded by the same stimuli results in slower reactions and more errors on the first stimulus after the task changes. This "switch cost" is reduced, but not usually eliminated, by the opportunity to prepare for a task switch. While there is agreement that this preparation effect indexes a control process performed before the stimulus, the "residual" cost has been attributed to several sources: to a control process essential for task-set reconfiguration that can be carried out only after the stimulus onset, to probabilistic failure to engage in preparation prior to the stimulus, and to two kinds of priming from previous trials: positive priming of the now-irrelevant task set and inhibition of the now-relevant task-set. The main evidence for the carry-over of inhibition is the observation that it is easier to switch from the stronger to the weaker of a pair of tasks afforded by the stimulus than vice versa. We survey available data on interactions between task switching and three manipulations of relative task strength: pre-experimental experience, stimulus-response compatibility, and intra-experimental practice. We conclude that it is far from universally true that it is easier to switch to the weaker task. Either inhibition of the stronger task-set is a strategy used only in the special case of extreme inequality in strength, or its consequences for later performance may be masked by slower post-stimulus control operations for more complex tasks. Inhibitory priming may also be stimulus specific.

AB - Switching between two tasks afforded by the same stimuli results in slower reactions and more errors on the first stimulus after the task changes. This "switch cost" is reduced, but not usually eliminated, by the opportunity to prepare for a task switch. While there is agreement that this preparation effect indexes a control process performed before the stimulus, the "residual" cost has been attributed to several sources: to a control process essential for task-set reconfiguration that can be carried out only after the stimulus onset, to probabilistic failure to engage in preparation prior to the stimulus, and to two kinds of priming from previous trials: positive priming of the now-irrelevant task set and inhibition of the now-relevant task-set. The main evidence for the carry-over of inhibition is the observation that it is easier to switch from the stronger to the weaker of a pair of tasks afforded by the stimulus than vice versa. We survey available data on interactions between task switching and three manipulations of relative task strength: pre-experimental experience, stimulus-response compatibility, and intra-experimental practice. We conclude that it is far from universally true that it is easier to switch to the weaker task. Either inhibition of the stronger task-set is a strategy used only in the special case of extreme inequality in strength, or its consequences for later performance may be masked by slower post-stimulus control operations for more complex tasks. Inhibitory priming may also be stimulus specific.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033641360&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033641360&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 11004879

AN - SCOPUS:0033641360

VL - 63

SP - 250

EP - 264

JO - Psychological Research

JF - Psychological Research

SN - 0340-0727

IS - 3-4

ER -