Task uncertainty can account for mixing and switch costs in task-switching
Cognitive control is required in situations that involve uncertainty or change, such as when resolving conflict, selecting responses and switching tasks. Recently, it has been suggested that cognitive control can be conceptualised as a mechanism which prioritises goal-relevant information to deal wi...
Saved in:
Published in: | PloS one Vol. 10; no. 6; p. e0131556 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
United States
Public Library of Science
24-06-2015
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Cognitive control is required in situations that involve uncertainty or change, such as when resolving conflict, selecting responses and switching tasks. Recently, it has been suggested that cognitive control can be conceptualised as a mechanism which prioritises goal-relevant information to deal with uncertainty. This hypothesis has been supported using a paradigm that requires conflict resolution. In this study, we examine whether cognitive control during task switching is also consistent with this notion. We used information theory to quantify the level of uncertainty in different trial types during a cued task-switching paradigm. We test the hypothesis that differences in uncertainty between task repeat and task switch trials can account for typical behavioural effects in task-switching. Increasing uncertainty was associated with less efficient performance (i.e., slower and less accurate), particularly on switch trials and trials that afford little opportunity for advance preparation. Interestingly, both mixing and switch costs were associated with a common episodic control process. These results support the notion that cognitive control may be conceptualised as an information processor that serves to resolve uncertainty in the environment. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 Conceived and designed the experiments: PSC FK. Performed the experiments: PSC PMG JLR. Analyzed the data: PSC PMG. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: PSC PMG. Wrote the paper: PSC PMG JLR FK. Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. These authors also contributed equally to this work. |
ISSN: | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
DOI: | 10.1371/journal.pone.0131556 |