Wk 11 - Attentional Control Flashcards
What is task switching? (x5)
Executive control operation
Contributes to dual task performance, AB limitations
Comes with accuracy/RT costs
Small if stimuli and responses differ – eg number task alternating with word task
Major if Ps changes task, = rule for common stimulus configuration
Isn’t Ps forgetting occasionally what to do next: not occasional slow trials, but consistent slowing over the RT distribution
What are the key findings of Jersild’s 1927 task-switching paradigm? (x3)
In a procedure involving… (x1)
Established that block of trials where two tasks are alternated takes longer than if tasks are repeated
Severe switch costs when task changes – enough to cover 8m stopping distance in a car
Changes are regular/predictable
AABB, AAABBB etc, using simple responses to digits or letters – practice/fatigue effects thus matched over switch and same task trials
What do task switching findings imply for the source of switching costs? (x3)
That they come in two parts: Establishing appropriate task set, and disengaging the inappropriate
Still present when repetition effects controlled
Even when motivation, fatigue, practice addressed, and RTs decrease, a residual switch cost remains - necessary to consider both endogenous and exogenous control
What are the characteristics of automaticity? (x6)
Egs (x2)
Without awareness; or Conscious deliberation; or Expenditure of resources. Fast and accurate Rigid/habitual Allows concurrent performance Driving car, riding bike, automatically reading the word in Stroop task; association of concepts – salt activates pepper
What situation produce automaticity (vs controlled processes)? (x2)
Practice
Over-learning
Describe the Baddeley/Hitch model of WM?
WM material goes after few seconds if not refreshed
Ltd to 4-7 items – info is displaced by new
Vs lTM: more permanent traces, unknown capacity, forgetting through interference and possibly decay
Constant interplay of WM and LTM in perceiving, speaking, action
Central executive co-ordinates the ‘slave’ systems that store info:
Phonological loop, visuo-spatial sketchpad, and (recently added, contentious) episodic buffer that links info across visual/verbal/spatial domains
How is the Baddeley Hitch model of WM linked to attentional control? (x2)
Attending to something puts it in WM
WM involved in directing attention
What key findings evaluate the Baddeley/Hitch model of WM/attentional control?
Central executive interference by concurrent tasks, eg chess, problem solving
Verbal info decay after 2 secs if not rehearsed
Diff in recall ability for short vs long words
What are the limitations of the Baddeley/Hitch model of WM/attentional control? (x2)
Doesn’t adequately explain how stores interact,
Or interplay of WM and LTM
Task set is… (x3)
Preparation to perform one task rather than another
Takes selection, linking, enabling modules for task components – eg perception, response selection
Links to irrelevant modules must be disabled
Repetition suppression is… (x1)
When there is less response to second stimuli in task-switching paradigm
Rogers and Monsell, 1995 used the AABB task-switching paradigm to establish that… (x2)
In a procedure involving… (x7)
Switch costs still present when switches are predictable
Cuing reduces costs, but doesn’t eliminate them
Stimuli – digit/letter pair, eg G7, B2
Digit task – right button for odd digit, left for even
Letter task – right button vowel, left consonant
Task cue: stim in one of four boxes – letter task for top two, digit for lower
Record accuracy and latency for switch vs non-switch trials
Improvement on day 2, esp for switch trial – so still some practice effects
But large switch cost still present, despite predictability
The effects of practice and task difficulty on costs associated with switching tasks are… (x2)
Which tells us that the… (x1)
Reduced but not eliminated with practice of separate tasks and switching tasks
Harder to switch from hard task to easier one, than other way round; eg the stroop task, from colour naming to word naming
Cost of disengaging from the prior task is a major factor – requires more effort/concentration, so is difficult
Meiran’s 1996 study into the effects of preparation time vs delay since last trial on switching costs found that… (x2)
In a study involving… (x3)
There is alway residual cost, despite task prep - so this isn’t whole story
Residual costs are exogenous/ stimulus driven: can’t make decisions for next trial until stim presented and ID’d; response selection on switch trials subject to interference from prior trial
Ps to give position of disk (up, down vs left, right) given pretrial cue
Varied cue-to-next-stim interval and last-response-to-cue interval
Short cue-to-stimulus interval = large switch cost, even if long delay since last trial
Rogers/Monsell paradigm also established attentional switching costs of task congruity, finding that… (x4)
RT impaired by using different button or same for responses
Task congruity, eg for letter-difit stimulus, letter task trial
Vowel letter + odd digit required the right button, so were congruent
Vowel letter + even digit = different buttons, so incongruent – leads to slower response than congruent
