Behavioural and electrophysiological measures of task switching during single and mixed-task conditions

Task Switching Processes

“…In prepared conditions, switch and repeat trials diverge as early as 150 ms, but at short CTIs, this effect is delayed until the switch positivity is resolved (Karayanidis et al, 2003;Muller, Schlee, Hartmann, Lorenz, & Weisz, 2009;Nicholson et al, 2005). N2 amplitude progressively increases across single-task, repeat, and switch trials (Goffaux, Phillips, Sinai, & Pushkar, 2006;Jost et al, 2008;Karayanidis, Whitson, Heathcote, & Michie, 2011), from univalent to bivalent targets (Hsieh & Liu, 2008;Karayanidis et al, 2003;Poulsen et al, 2005), and progressively reduces with increasing the length of repeat runs (i.e., ABB vs. ABBB, vs. ABBBB; Wylie et al, 2003). The increase in N2 amplitude with increasing level of interference is accompanied by progressive reduction in P3b amplitude, consistent with greater difficulty of decision processes.…”

Neural correlates of response-effector switching using event-related potentials

“…Regarding stimulus-locked switch-related ERP components, most studies in this field have identified a smaller positivity (a P3b-like component), which peaks approximately 400-800 ms after the stimulus onset for task switches relative to repeat trials at centroparietal sites (e.g., Barceló, Periáñez, & Knight, 2002;Gehring, Bryck, Jonides, Albin, & Badre, 2003;Goffaux et al, 2006;Hsieh & Chen, 2006;Hsieh & Liu, 2008Karayanidis et al, 2003;Kieffaber & Hetrick, 2005;Poulsen, Luu, Davey, & Tucker, 2005;Swainson et al, 2003;Wylie, Javitt, & Foxe, 2003). This ERP effect has been hypothesized to reflect the difference in the difficulty in implementing the task rule and/or resolving interference at the response selection/execution level (Ikeda & Hasegawa, 2012;Jamadar, Michie, & Karayanidis, 2010;), yet some other researchers have related this switch-related ERP effect to working memory processes (Barceló et al, 2002;Gehring et al, 2003).…”

“…This centroparietal positive shift (known as P3b-like centroparietal positivity) occurs approximately 400 ms after cue onset, which has often been interpreted as an anticipatory preparation for the upcoming task (e.g., Goffaux, Phillips, Sinai, & Pushkar, 2006;Karayanidis, Coltheart, Michie, & Murphy, 2003;Kieffaber & Hetrick, 2005;Lavric, Mizon, & Monsell, 2008;Miniussi, Marzi, & Nobre, 2005;Nicholson, Karayanidis, Poboka, Heathcote, & Michie, 2005;Rushworth et al, 2002;Swainson et al, 2003). In addition, a long-lasting late frontal negativity (LFN) that starts at 300 ms after cue presentation has also been reported in previous studies, and this LFN might reflect the preparation for an upcoming response conflict (Astle, Jackson, & Swainson, 2006;Astle, Jackson, & Swainson, 2008a.b;Mueller, Swainson, & Jackson, 2007).…”

The Role of Physical Fitness in the Neurocognitive Performance of Task Switching in Older Persons with Mild Cognitive Impairment

“…Although older adults need to meet more processing demands compared to younger adults during maintenance and retrieval of two task sets concurrently held in working memory when performing a task-switching paradigm task [68,69], and the older adults with MCI showed prolonged P2 latency as compared to the healthy controls when performing a highly working memory demanding two-back task [24], in the present study we observed no difference in P2 latency or amplitude between aMCI and control groups, suggesting that neural mechanisms of cognitive control with regard to a shift of target modality, task-set activation [49,51], and cue-task retrieval processes [70] is not compromised in aMCI. However, the ERP P2 component is also associated with a component of the switching cost [50].…”