“Optimal suppression” as a solution to the paradoxical cost of multitasking: examination of suppression specificity in task switching

Inhibition during task switching is affected by the number of competing tasks

Inhibition during task switching is assumed to be indexed by n - 2 repetition costs-that is, performance costs when the task in the current trial equals the task in trial n - 2 (sequences of type ABA) compared with two consecutive switches to another task each (sequences CBA). The present study examined effects of a short-term reduction of the number of candidate tasks on these costs. For this purpose, a variant of the task switching paradigm was used in which in half of the trials, a precue that preceded the task cue allowed for a short-term reduction of the number of candidate tasks. In Experiment 1, one out of three tasks could be excluded. In Experiment 2, one or two out of four tasks could be excluded. Experiment 3 served as control condition using the standard cueing paradigm. Significant n - 2 repetition costs were present with three candidate tasks. In contrast, no costs were visible when the number of candidate tasks was reduced to two. This result is interpreted in terms of a task selection mechanism based on antagonistic constraints among task representations, which operates on a rather superficial level when switching among only two tasks, thereby reducing the need for inhibition.

Power of instructions for task implementation: superiority of explicitly instructed over inferred rules

"Power of instructions" originally referred to automatic response activation associated with instructed rules, but previous examination of the power of instructed rules in actual task implementation has been limited. Typical tasks involve both explicit aspects (e.g., instructed stimulus-response mapping rules) and implied, yet easily inferred aspects (e.g., be ready, attend to error beeps) and it is unknown if inferred aspects also become readily executable like their explicitly instructed counterparts. In each mini-block of our paradigm we introduced a novel two-choice task. In the instructions phase, one stimulus was explicitly mapped to a response; whereas the other stimulus' response mapping had to be inferred. Results show that, in most cases, explicitly instructed rules were implemented more efficiently than inferred rules, but this advantage was observed only in the first trial following instructions (though not in the first implementation of the rules), which suggests that the entire task set was implemented in the first trial. Theoretical implications are discussed.

Increased cognitive control after task conflict? Investigating the N-3 effect in task switching

Task inhibition is considered to facilitate switching to a new task and is assumed to decay slowly over time. Hence, more persisting inhibition needs to be overcome when returning to a task after one intermediary trial (ABA task sequence) than when returning after two or more intermediary trials (CBA task sequence). Schuch and Grange (J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 41:760-767, 2015) put forward the hypothesis that there is higher task conflict in ABA than CBA sequences, leading to increased cognitive control in the subsequent trial. They provided evidence that performance is better in trials following ABA than following CBA task sequences. Here, this effect of the previous task sequence ("N-3 effect") is further investigated by varying the cue-stimulus interval (CSI), allowing for short (100 ms) or long (900 ms) preparation time for the upcoming task. If increased cognitive control after ABA involves a better preparation for the upcoming task, the N-3 effect should be larger with long than short CSI. The results clearly show that this is not the case. In Experiment 1, the N-3 effect was smaller with long than short CSI; in Experiment 2, the N-3 effect was not affected by CSI. Diffusion model analysis confirmed previous results in the literature (regarding the effect of CSI and of the ABA-CBA difference); however, the N-3 effect was not unequivocally associated with any of the diffusion model parameters. In exploratory analysis, we also tested the alternative hypothesis that the N-3 effect involves more effective task shielding, which would be reflected in reduced congruency effects in trials following ABA, relative to trials following CBA; congruency effects did not differ between these conditions. Taken together, we can rule out two potential explanations of the N-3 effect: Neither is this effect due to enhanced task preparation, nor to more effective task shielding.