Multiple response codes play specific roles in response selection and inhibition under task switching

Abstract

Several task-switch studies show that response category repetition is favorable on task repetition trials, but disadvantageous on task switch trials. In the present study we investigated how this interaction depends on the type and number of involved response categories. In a dual-task number-categorization experiment, subjects had to respond to tasks T 1 and T 2 with one of the two Wngers of their left and right hand, respectively. For one group of participants, the use of spatial response categories, and for another group the use of Wnger-type categories was induced. It turned out that the interaction between task switching and response category repetition was clearly related to the induced response categories, but at the same time, the spatial categories nevertheless also aVected response selection in the Wnger-type group. However, these two eVects were additive. This shows that multiple response codes can simultaneously be involved in response selection, but that they aVect performance diVerentially.

Stimulation of contacts in ventral but not dorsal subthalamic nucleus normalizes response switching in Parkinson's disease

“…a ‘change all’ signal), (ii) increased difficulty uncoupling recently established stimulus-response mappings, or (iii) the selective suppression of the last-executed (and possibly still active) response (Rogers & Monsell, 1995). Current behavioral evidence more strongly supports the latter, selective suppression, hypothesis (Cooper & Mari-Beffa, 2008; Hübner & Druey, 2006, 2008). We speculate that this difficulty in repeating the same response when a switch occurs might be a ‘built in’ basal ganglia design, consistent with the computational requirement for a clean switch to prevent dithering (Redgrave, Prescott, & Gurney, 1999).…”

Distinct brain responses to different inhibitions: Evidence from a modified Flanker Task

“…It is likely that these two possible factors cause the non-significant difference in RT between the rule inhibition and non-inhibition conditions. The RTs for the response inhibition condition was significantly longer than the non-inhibition condition, reflecting response inhibition and response change 66 , 67 , 77 .…”

“…If the current trial in a flanker task had the identical stimulus and the same response as the preceding trial, there would be a response repetition benefit 66 – 70 . In the classical choice RT tasks, identical stimulus-reaction (S-R) trials are usually associated with particularly fast responses, which is suggested to reflect remission of the same and the most recent response on detection of an identical stimulus reoccurrence 71 – 73 .…”

Feature Integration and Task Switching: Diminished Switch Costs after Controlling for Stimulus, Response, and Cue Repetitions

“…Thus, faster performance in the task repetition condition might, in part, be explained by these stimulus repetitions. Although stimulus repetitions are sometimes disallowed in the procedure or trimmed after the fact [ 26 – 28 ], this is not always the case.…”