Task-switching experiments have documented a puzzling phenomenon: Advance warning of the switch reduces but does not eliminate the switch cost. Theoretical accounts have posited that the residual switch cost arises when one selects the relevant stimulus–response mapping, leaving earlier perceptual processes unaffected. We put this assumption to the test by seeking electrophysiological markers of encoding a perceptual dimension. Participants categorized a colored letter as a vowel or consonant or its color as “warm” or “cold.” Orthogonally to the color manipulation, some colors were eight times more frequent than others, and the letters were in upper- or lowercase. Color frequency modulated the electroencephalogram amplitude at around 150 ms when participants repeated the color-classification task. When participants switched from the letter task to the color task, this effect was significantly delayed. Thus, even when prepared for, a task switch delays or prolongs encoding of the relevant perceptual dimension.
AllportD. A.StylesE. A.HsiehS. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In UmiltàC.MoscovitchM. (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
ChawlaD.ReesG.FristonK. J. (1999). The physiological basis of attentional modulation in extrastriate visual areas. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 671–676.
3.
De JongR. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In MonsellS.DriverJ. (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 357–376). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4.
EimerM. (2014). The neural basis of attentional control in visual search. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 526–535.
5.
ElchleppH.LavricA.ChambersC. D.VerbruggenF. (2016). Proactive inhibitory control: A general biasing account. Cognitive Psychology, 86, 27–61.
6.
ElchleppH.LavricA.MizonG. A.MonsellS. (2012). A brain-potential study of task-switching with stimuli that afford only the relevant task. Human Brain Mapping, 33, 1137–1154.
7.
ElchleppH.LavricA.MonsellS. (2015). A change of task prolongs early processes: Evidence from ERPs in lexical tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 299–325.
8.
FiedlerA.SchröterH.UlrichR. (2009). No evidence for a late locus of switch costs. Brain Research, 1253, 74–80.
9.
GiesbrechtB.WeissmanD. H.WoldorffM. G.MangunG. R. (2006). Pre-target activity in visual cortex predicts behavioral performance on spatial and feature attention tasks. Brain Research, 1080, 63–72.
10.
HsiehS.YuY. T. (2003). Exploring the nature of switch cost: Inferences from P300 and the lateralized readiness potentials.Brain Research Protocols, 12, 49–59.
11.
KarayanidisF.JamadarS.RugeH.PhillipsN.HeathcoteA.ForstmannB. U. (2010). Advance preparation in task-switching: Converging evidence from behavioral, brain activation, and model-based approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, Article 25. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00025
12.
KarayanidisF.JamadarS. D. (2014). Event-related potentials reveal multiple components of proactive and reactive control in task switching. In GrangeJ. A.HoughtonG. (Eds.), Task switching and cognitive control (pp. 200–236). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
13.
KieselA.MillerJ. O.JolicoeurP.BrissonB. (2008). Measurement of ERP latency differences: A comparison of single-participant and jackknife-based scoring methods. Psychophysiology, 45, 250–274.
14.
KieselA.SteinhauserM.WendtM.FalkensteinM.JostK.PhilippA.KochI. (2010). Control and interference in task switching—a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849–874.
15.
LavricA.MizonG. A.MonsellS. (2008). Neurophysiological signature of effective anticipatory task-set control: A task-switching investigation. European Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28, 1016–1029.
16.
LongmanC. S.LavricA.MonsellS. (2013). More attention to attention? An eye-tracking investigation of selection of perceptual attributes during a task switch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1142–1151.
17.
LongmanC. S.LavricA.MonsellS. (2016). The coupling between spatial attention and other components of task-set: A task-switching investigation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 2248–2275. doi:10.1080/17470218.2015.1115112
18.
LongmanC. S.LavricA.MunteanuC.MonsellS. (2014). Attentional inertia and delayed orienting of spatial attention in task-switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 1580–1602.
19.
MayrU.KuhnsD.HubbardJ. (2014). Long-term memory and the control of attentional control. Cognitive Psychology, 72, 1–26.
20.
MeiranN. (2000). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In MonsellS.DriverJ. (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 377–399). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MonsellS. (2015). Task-set control and task switching. In FawcettJ. M.RiskoE. F.KingstoneA. (Eds.), The handbook of attention (pp. 139–172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
MonsellS.MizonG. A. (2006). Can the task-cueing paradigm measure “endogenous” task-set reconfiguration?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 493–516.
24.
MüllerH. J.ReimannB.KrummenacherJ. (2003). Visual search for singleton feature targets across dimensions: Stimulus- and expectancy-driven effects in dimensional weighting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 1021–1035.
25.
NieuwenhuisS.MonsellS. (2002). Residual costs in task switching: Testing the failure-to-engage hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 86–92.
26.
PeelenM. V.KastnerS. (2011). A neural basis for real-world visual search in human occipitotemporal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 108, 12125–12130.
27.
RogersR. D.MonsellS. (1995). The costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.
StokesM. G.ThompsonR.NobreA. C.DuncanJ. (2009). Shape-specific preparatory activity mediates attention to targets in human visual cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 106, 19569–19574.
30.
VandierendonckA.LiefoogheB.VerbruggenF. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601–626.
31.
WaszakF.HommelB.AllportA. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus–task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413.
32.
WaszakF.HommelB.AllportA. (2005). Interaction of task readiness and automatic retrieval in task switching: Negative priming and competitor priming. Memory & Cognition, 33, 595–610.
33.
YeungN.MonsellS. (2003). Switching between tasks of unequal familiarity: The role of stimulus-attribute and response-set selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 455–469.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
