Does explicit expectation really affect preparation?

Feeling better: Tactile verbs speed up tactile detection

Embodiment of action-related language into the motor system has been extensively documented. Yet the case of sensory words, especially referring to touch, remains overlooked. We investigated the influence of verbs denoting tactile sensations on tactile perception. In Experiment 1, participants detected tactile stimulations on their forearm, preceded by tactile or non-tactile verbs by one of three delays (170, 350, 500 ms) reflecting different word processing stages. Results revealed shorter reaction times to tactile stimulations following tactile than non-tactile verbs, irrespective of delay. To ensure that priming pertained to tactile, and not motor, verb properties, Experiment 2 compared the impact of tactile verbs to both action and non-tactile verbs, while stimulations were delivered on the index finger. No priming emerged following action verbs, therefore not supporting the motor-grounded interpretation. Facilitation by tactile verbs was however not observed, possibly owing to methodological changes. Experiment 3, identical to Experiment 2 except that stimulation was delivered to participants' forearm, replicated the priming effect. Importantly, tactile stimulations were detected faster after tactile than after both non-tactile and action verbs, indicating that verbs' tactile properties engaged resources shared with sensory perception. Our findings suggest that language conveying tactile information can activate somatosensory representations and subsequently promote tactile detection.

Instructed and Acquired Contingencies in Response-Inhibition Tasks

Inhibitory control can be triggered directly via the retrieval of previously acquired stimulus-stop associations from memory. However, a recent study suggests that this item-specific stop learning may be mediated via expectancies of the contingencies in play (Best, Lawrence, Logan, McLaren, & Verbruggen, 2016). This could indicate that stimulus-stop learning also induces strategic proactive changes in performance. We further tested this hypothesis in the present study. In addition to measuring expectancies following task completion, we introduced a between-subjects expectancy manipulation in which one group of participants were informed about the stimulus-stop contingencies and another group did not receive any information about the stimulus-stop contingencies. Moreover, we combined this instruction manipulation with a distractor manipulation that was previously used to examine strategic proactive adjustments. We found that the stop-associated items slowed responding in both conditions. Furthermore, participants in both conditions generated expectancies following task completion that were consistent with the stimulus-stop contingencies. The distractor manipulation was ineffective. However, we found differences in the relationship between the expectancy ratings and task performance: in the instructed condition, the expectancies reliably correlated with the response slowing for the stop-associated items, whereas in the uninstructed condition we found no reliable correlation. These differences between the correlations were reliable, and our conclusions were further supported by Bayesian analyses. We conclude that stimulus-stop associations that are acquired either via task instructions or via task practice have similar effects on behaviour but could differ in how they elicit response slowing.

On the contribution of overt tactile expectations to visuo-tactile interactions within the peripersonal space

Since the discovery of neural regions in the monkey brain that respond preferentially to multisensory stimuli presented in proximal space, researchers have been studying this specialised spatial representation in humans. It has been demonstrated that approaching auditory or visual stimuli modulate tactile processing, while they are within the peripersonal space (PPS). The aim of the current study is to investigate the additional effects of tactile expectation on the PPS-related multisensory interactions. Based on the output of a computational simulation, we expected that as tactile expectation increases rapidly during the course of the motion of the visual stimulus, the outcome RT curves would mask the multisensory contribution of PPS. When the tactile expectation remains constant during the motion, the PPS-related spatially selective multisensory processes become apparent. The behavioural results on human experiments followed the pattern predicted by the simulation. That is, rapidly changing levels of tactile expectation, caused by dynamic visual stimuli, masks the outcome of the multisensory processes within peripersonal space. This indicates that both PPS-related multisensory interactions and tactile expectations play an important role in anticipating and responding to interactions with the body.

Tied to expectations: Predicting features speeds processing even under adverse circumstances

When participants predict the upcoming stimulus in a randomized choice reaction task, a match between prediction and stimulus increases processing speed at a level similar to that observed in cueing studies with highly valid cues. This might be taken to suggest that people cannot help but fully use their self-generated, verbalized predictions for preparing task processing. Thus, we tested how flexibly participants can control formation and implementation of predictions. In Experiment 1, we varied validity and response-relevance of predictions. We observed that prediction effects on RT can be boosted by increasing validity, but prevail under adverse circumstances. This was not the case in a control group who read rather than predicted the feature words, suggesting that the effect was specific to predictions as such. Experiment 2 provided further evidence for limited control of participants over implementing and forming predictions. Participants were provided with practice on stimuli occurring with varying frequency, but neither learned to strategically choose predictions to maximize the number of match trials, nor did they reduce the amount of prediction-based preparation when predicting an infrequent stimulus. As sequential aftereffects of prediction match did not vary with validity, they were identified as an independent effect of verbalizing a response-relevant stimulus feature. The results are consistent with the view that the predicted stimulus feature is represented in the focus of attention in working memory and that the amount of implementation can be subject to weighting.

(No) time for control: Frontal theta dynamics reveal the cost of temporally guided conflict anticipation

During situations of response conflict, cognitive control is characterized by prefrontal theta-band (3- to 8-Hz) activity. It has been shown that cognitive control can be triggered proactively by contextual cues that predict conflict. Here, we investigated whether a pretrial preparation interval could serve as such a cue. This would show that the temporal contingencies embedded in the task can be used to anticipate upcoming conflict. To this end, we recorded electroencephalography (EEG) from 30 human subjects while they performed a version of a Simon task in which the duration of a fixation cross between trials predicted whether the next trial would contain response conflict. Both their behavior and EEG activity showed a consistent but unexpected pattern of results: The conflict effect (increased reaction times and decreased accuracy on conflict as compared to nonconflict trials) was stronger when conflict was cued, and this was associated with stronger conflict-related midfrontal theta activity and functional connectivity. Interestingly, intervals that predicted conflict did show a pretarget increase in midfrontal theta power. These findings suggest that temporally guided expectations of conflict do heighten conflict anticipation, but also lead to less efficiently applied reactive control. We further explored this post-hoc interpretation by means of three behavioral follow-up experiments, in which we used nontemporal cues, semantically informative cues, and neutral cues. Together, this body of results suggests that the counterintuitive cost of conflict cueing may not be uniquely related to the temporal domain, but may instead be related to the implicitness and validity of the cue.

Lost in dissociation: The main paradigms in unconscious cognition

Contemporary studies in unconscious cognition are essentially founded on dissociation, i.e., on how it dissociates with respect to conscious mental processes and representations. This is claimed to be in so many and diverse ways that one is often lost in dissociation. In order to reduce this state of confusion we here carry out two major tasks: based on the central distinction between cognitive processes and representations, we identify and isolate the main dissociation paradigms; we then critically analyze their key tenets and reported findings.

Incorrect predictions reduce switch costs

In three experiments, we combined two sources of conflict within a modified task-switching procedure. The first source of conflict was the one inherent in any task switching situation, namely the conflict between a task set activated by the recent performance of another task and the task set needed to perform the actually relevant task. The second source of conflict was induced by requiring participants to guess aspects of the upcoming task (Exps. 1 & 2: task identity; Exp. 3: position of task precue). In case of an incorrect guess, a conflict accrues between the representation of the guessed task and the actually relevant task. In Experiments 1 and 2, incorrect guesses led to an overall increase of reaction times and error rates, but they reduced task switch costs compared to conditions in which participants predicted the correct task. In Experiment 3, incorrect guesses resulted in faster performance overall and to a selective decrease of reaction times in task switch trials when the cue-target interval was long. We interpret these findings in terms of an enhanced level of controlled processing induced by a combination of two sources of conflict converging upon the same target of cognitive control.

Expectation mismatch: differences between self-generated and cue-induced expectations

Expectation of upcoming stimuli and tasks can lead to improved performance, if the anticipated situation occurs, while expectation mismatch can lead to less efficient processing. Researchers have used methodological approaches that rely on either self-generated expectations (predictions) or cue-induced expectations to investigate expectation mismatch effects. Differentiating these two types of expectations for different contents of expectation such as stimuli, responses, task sets and conflict level, we review evidence suggesting that self-generated expectations lead to larger facilitating effects and conflict effects on the behavioral and neural level - as compared to cue-based expectations. On a methodological level, we suggest that self-generated as compared to cue-induced expectations allow for a higher amount of experimental control in many experimental designs on expectation effects. On a theoretical level, we argue for qualitative differences in how cues vs. self-generated expectations influence performance. While self-generated expectations might generally involve representing the expected event in the focus of attention in working memory, cues might only lead to such representations under supportive circumstances (i.e., cue of high validity and attended).

Instructed task demands and utilization of action effect anticipation

Automatic acquisition of action effect associations may serve as a parsimonious account of how people acquire the basis for intentionally controlled action. However, recent research suggests that learning or the expression of action effect links might depend on whether task demands impose either a stimulus based mode of action control or an intention based action control mode. In the current study we develop a paradigm that allows the mode of action control to be varied via instructions while keeping stimuli identical. Participants were to respond to the location of a cloud of dots. Their actions were followed by predictable visual effects, either consistently congruent or incongruent with the location of the action. In Experiment 1, a displaced new cloud of random dots was presented as a spatial action effect. In Experiment 2 an arrow was presented as effect with a pointing direction congruent or incongruent to the response position. The location of the stimulus in the reference frame was easy to detect in some of the trials while the location of the cloud of dots was completely ambiguous in others. The instruction manipulation targeted the latter trials, suggesting to one group of participants to freely choose a key in a difficult trial, while asking another group to react to their spontaneous impression in the event of a difficult stimulus. In this way, we aimed at rendering actions either as stimulus driven or internally generated. By this we could investigate how effect anticipation changed with practice depending on action mode. We employed the impact of action effect compatibility on speed and choice of action as a measure for action effect anticipation. Our results suggest that action effect associations can be acquired when instructions suggest stimulus based action control or intention based action control. Instructions aiming at the mode of task processing can influence when and how action effect links influence behavior.

What I Say is What I Get: Stronger Effects of Self-Generated vs. Cue-Induced Expectations in Event-Related Potentials

Expectations regarding future events enable preparatory processes and allow for faster responses to expected stimuli compared to unexpected stimuli. Expectations can have internal sources or follow external cues. While many studies on expectation effects use some form of cueing, a direct comparison with self-generated expectations involving behavioral and psychophysiological measures is lacking. In the present study we compare cue-induced expectations with self-generated expectations that are both expressed verbally in a within-subjects design, measuring behavioral performance, and event-related brain potentials (ERPs). Response time benefits for expected stimuli are much larger when expectations are self-generated as compared to externally cued. Increased amplitudes in both the N2 and P3 components for violations of self-generated expectations suggest that this advantage can at least partially be ascribed to greater perceptual preparation. This goes along with a missing benefit for stimuli matching the expected response only and is mirrored in the lateralized readiness potential (LRP). Taken together, behavioral and ERP findings indicate that self-generated expectations lead to increased premotoric preparation compared to cue-induced expectations. Underlying cognitive or neuronal functional differences between these types of expectation remain a subject for future studies.