Biomedical subjects

Erik M Altmann

Publications and source records attributed to Erik M Altmann.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Repetition priming in task switching: do the benefits dissipate?

In task-switching research, one process that has been implicated as a possible source of switch cost is repetition priming. In four experiments, an examination was made of the claim that repetition priming dissipates over the interval between trials and thereby causes switch cost to decrease with increases in the response-cue interval (RCI). In Experiments 1 and 2, RCI was manipulated within participants, producing the standard RCI effect on switch cost. In Experiments 3 and 4, RCI was manipulated between participants and had no effect on switch cost. The role of experimental design and the mixed pattern of effects on switch and repeat trials in Experiments 1 and 2 suggest that a passive architectural process such as priming dissipation is not responsible for the RCI effect on switch cost. Repetition priming may still be responsible for some or all of switch cost, but it appears to be more stable over time than was previously thought.

Humans↗

PubMed2004

Advance preparation in task switching: what work is being done?

The preparation effect in task switching is usually interpreted to mean that a switching process makes use of the interval between task-cue onset and trial-stimulus onset (the cue-stimulus interval, or CSI) to accomplish some of its work ahead of time. This study undermines the empirical basis for this interpretation and suggests that task activation, not task switching, is the functional process in cognitive control. Experiments 1 and 2 used an explicit cuing paradigm, and Experiments 3 and 4 used a variation in which the trial after a task cue was followed by several cueless trials, requiring retention of the cue in memory. Experiments 1 and 3 replicated the preparation effect on switch cost, and Experiments 2 and 4 showed that this effect vanishes when CSI is manipulated between subjects, leaving only a main effect of CSI when the task cue is a memory load.

Attention↗

PubMed2004

The preparation effect in task switching: carryover of SOA.

A common finding in task-switching studies is switch preparation (commonly known as the preparation effect), in which a longer interval between task cue and trial stimulus (i.e., a longer stimulus onset asynchrony, or SOA) reduces the cost of switching to a different task. Three experiments link switch preparation to within-subjects manipulations of SOA. In Experiment 1, SOA was randomized within subjects, producing switch preparation that was more pronounced when the SOA switched from the previous trial than when the SOA repeated. In Experiment 2, SOA was blocked within subjects, producing switch preparation but not on the first block of trials. In Experiment 3, SOA was manipulated between subjects with sufficient statistical power to detect switch preparation, but the effect was absent. The results favor an encoding view of cognitive control, but show that any putative switching mechanism reacts lazily when exposed to only one SOA.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Tasks of a feather flock together: similarity effects in task switching.

Recent research on task switching has paid little attention to how tasks are represented and how the relations between task representations might affect the executive processes engaged to achieve a task switch. Two experiments investigated the effect of task similarity on task switching. Similarity was defined in terms of shared component operations--attentional control settings in Experiment 1 and response modality in Experiment 2--with tasks sharing more component operations said to be more similar to each other than tasks sharing fewer component operations. Across both experiments, task similarity facilitated task switching, seen in reduced switch costs for switching between similar tasks as opposed to dissimilar tasks. These results indicate that task similarity defined in terms of component operations can be used to define a multidimensional task space in which the executive processes of task selection and implementation are active.

Attention↗

PubMed2002

Functional decay of memory for tasks.

Correct performance often depends on remembering the task one has been instructed to do. When the task periodically changes, memory for the current task must decay (lose activation) to prevent it from interfering with memory for the next task when that is encoded. Three task-switching experiments examine this decay process. Each shows within-run slowing, a performance decline occurring as memory for the current task decays. In experiment 1, slowing is attenuated when memory for the task is optional, suggesting that memory is indeed causal. Experiment 2 finds slowing despite a flat hazard rate for task instructions, suggesting that slowing is not an artifact of instruction anticipation. Experiment 3 finds slowing in the familiar alternating-runs paradigm (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), suggesting that it may lurk elsewhere. A process model of activation explains within-run slowing and relates it to switch cost and "restart cost" (Allport & Wylie, 2000) in functional terms.

Analysis of Variance↗

PubMed2002

Forgetting to remember: the functional relationship of decay and interference.

Functional decay theory proposes that decay and interference, historically viewed as competing accounts of forgetting, are instead functionally related. The theory posits that (a) when an attribute must be updated frequently in memory, its current value decays to prevent interference with later values, and (b) the decay rate adapts to the rate of memory updates. Behavioral predictions of the theory were tested in a task-switching paradigm in which memory for the current task had to be updated every few seconds, hundreds of times. Reaction times and error rates both increased gradually between updates, reflecting decay of memory for the current task. This performance decline was slower when updates were less frequent, reflecting a decrease in the decay rate following a decrease in the update rate. A candidate mechanism for controlled decay is proposed, the data are reconciled with practice effects, and implications for models of executive control are discussed.

Humans↗