slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
A Common Principle of Conflict Resolution in Single and Dual-Task Settings PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
A Common Principle of Conflict Resolution in Single and Dual-Task Settings

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 80

A Common Principle of Conflict Resolution in Single and Dual-Task Settings - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 102 Views
  • Uploaded on

A Common Principle of Conflict Resolution in Single and Dual-Task Settings. Sander A. Los Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam. The sign of. orro. Zorro appears at the critical moment Zorro’s dual strike. Zorro appears at the critical moment. Variable-foreperiod design. S1. S2. R.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A Common Principle of Conflict Resolution in Single and Dual-Task Settings' - marva


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

A Common Principle of Conflict Resolution in Single and Dual-Task Settings

Sander A. Los

Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide2

The sign of

orro

  • Zorro appears at the critical moment
  • Zorro’s dual strike

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide3

Zorro appears at the critical moment

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide4

Variable-foreperiod design

S1

S2

R

Foreperiod (FP)

RT

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide5

Variable-foreperiod design

S1

Time

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide6

Variable-foreperiod design

Critical moments

S1

Time

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide7

Variable-foreperiod design

Imperative moment

S1

S2

Time

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide8

Variable-foreperiod design

(Zahn et al., 1963)

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide9

Variable-foreperiod design

(Zahn et al., 1963)

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide10

Accounts

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide11

Activation view: re-preparation

S1

time

S2 on trial n - 1

Suppose: S2 appeared at the 2nd critical moment on trial n - 1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide12

Activation view: re-preparation

S1

time

Expectancy trial n

Suppose: S2 appeared at the 2nd critical moment on trial n - 1

=> Expect S2 at 2nd critical moment on trial n

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide13

Activation view: re-preparation

S1

time

S2 on trial n

Suppose: S2 appeared at the 2nd critical moment on trial n - 1

=> Expect S2 at 2nd critical moment on trial n

  • S2 occurs before expected moment: RT = long

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide14

Activation view: re-preparation

S1

time

S2 on trial n

Suppose: S2 appeared at the 2nd critical moment on trial n - 1

=> Expect S2 at 2nd critical moment on trial n

  • S2 occurs before expected moment: RT = long
  • S2 occurs at the expected moment: RT = short

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide15

Activation view: re-preparation

repreparation

S1

time

S2 on trial n

Suppose: S2 appeared at the 2nd critical moment on trial n - 1

=> Expect S2 at 2nd critical moment on trial n

  • S2 occurs before expected moment: RT = long
  • S2 occurs at the expected moment: RT = short
  • S2 occurs beyond the expected moment: RT = short!

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

(e.g., Niemi & Näätänen, 1981)

slide16

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide17

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

S1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide18

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide19

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide20

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide21

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide22

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide23

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide24

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the first critical moment:

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide25

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the first critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide26

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the first critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide27

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the first critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide28

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the first critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide29

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the first critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide30

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide31

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide32

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the second critical moment:

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide33

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the second critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide34

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the second critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide35

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the second critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide36

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the second critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide37

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Bypassing the second critical moment: Extinction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide38

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide39

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide40

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide41

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

S2

The imperative moment:

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide42

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

The imperative moment: Reinforcement

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide43

Inhibition view: Trace conditioning

Note: state of conditioning associated with the last critical moment remains unchanged.

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide44

Accounts

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide45

Experiment:Probing the inhibitory process

  • Go / no-go task with respect to S2 in variable FP design
  • Evidence for response inhibition on no-go trials
  • After a no-go trial, extinction replaces reinforcement at the
  • imperative moment

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide46

Design

Conditions:

1. 50% “ready” go trials

Time

Response

1300 or 2200 ms, S2: Go

1000 ms, S1 off: start FP

Ready

0 ms, S1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide47

Design

Conditions:

1. 50% “ready” go trials

2. 25% “ready” no-go trials

Time

No Response

1300 or 2200 ms, S2: NoGo

1000 ms, S1 off: start FP

Ready

0 ms, S1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide48

Design

Conditions:

1. 50% “ready” go trials

2. 25% “ready” no-go trials

3. 25% “relax” no-go trials

Time

No Response

1300 or 2200 ms, S2: NoGo

1000 ms, S1 off: start FP

Relax

0 ms, S1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide49

Predictions

N - 1 = “ready” go: extinction only when bypassing the critical moment

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide50

Predictions

N - 1 = “ready” no-go: extinction both when bypassing the

critical moment and at the imperative moment

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide51

Predictions

N - 1 = “relax”no-go: extinction neither when bypassing the critical moment nor at the imperative moment

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide52

Findings

FP on trial n is long: confirms prediction

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide53

Findings

FP on trial n = short:

Zorro appears

(... but is a bit off target)

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide54

Conclusions (1)

Consistent with the trace conditioning account, response inhibition on trial n - 1 affects RT on trial n.

State of preparation

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide55

Conclusions (2)

Response inhibition accounts directly for sequential effects of foreperiod.

(Zahn et al., 1963)

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide56

Conclusions (3)

Response inhibition accounts indirectly for the classical FP – RT function.

(Zahn et al., 1963)

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide57

Common themes in Single- and Dual-Task Control

  • Switching between levels of an independent variable
  • Result: asymmetric switch costs
  • Involvement of inhibitory processing

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide58

2. Zorro’s dual strike

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide59

Task switch paradigm

Participants apply task sets A and B on different trials, as specified by a preceding cue:

A ABB B BA B AA …...

Nonswitch: task set on trial n = task set on trial n - 1

Switch: task set on trial n task set on trial n - 1

  • Typical findings:
  • Switch costs: RTnonswitch < RTswitch
  • Residual switch costs: switch costs when the cue-target interval is relatively long (e.g., exceeding 1,000 ms).

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide60

Task switch paradigm

Two questions:

1.Origin of switch costs: where do switch costs come from?

2.Control of switch costs: Can switch costs be reduced to zero by endogenous means during a long preparatory interval?

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide61

Origin of Switch Costs

Mayr & Keele (2000): Three task sets: A, B, C

C B A

A B A

Finding: RTCBA < RTABA

“Backward inhibition”: on trial n - 1 participants inhibit the task set performed on trial n - 2, leading to costs on trial n if the task set on trial n is the same as on trial n - 2.

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide62

switch costs are caused by endogenous task set preparation on trial n - 1.

switch costs are caused by task set competition

on trial n - 1.

Origin of Switch Costs

When does backward inhibition come into play?

1. During the Cue - Target interval

2. After the onset of the target stimulus

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide63

Schuch & Koch, 2003

  • Combined task switch, go / no-go design.
  • A tone was presented simultaneously with the target:
  • High tone (75%): Go: Apply task set
  • Low tone (25%): No-go: Don’t apply task set

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide64

Schuch & Koch, 2003

Cue: Square (odd / even) or

diamond (higher / lower 5)

CTI: 100 or 1,000 ms

Target: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9

Tone: high (go, 75%)

or low (no-go, 25%)

2

R n

Tone + Target

100 or 1,000 ms

Cue

600 ms

R n – 1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide65

Schuch & Koch, 2003

Main Finding:

Switch costs were only observed after a go trial, not after a no-go trial.

Conclusion:

Switch costs require task-set application. Switch costs result from task-set competition.

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide66

Schuch & Koch, 2003

Problem:

Given that no task-set competition occurred on no-go trials, why was RT relatively long after a no-go trial?

Proposed solution:

A no-gon – 1 trial prolongs another stage (or other stages) on trial n.

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide67

Schuch & Koch, 2003

Response selection

Stage X

Trial Type

Responsen - 1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide68

Present study

Response selection

Stage X

Factor

Trial Type

Responsen - 1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide69

Present study

Decision whether to respond

Response selection

TTI

Trial Type

Responsen - 1

Hypothesis: stage X represents a decision-whether-to-respond stage, selectively influenced by the Tone – Target Interval (TTI).

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide70

Design

Cue: odd - even or high - low

TTI: 0 or 1,000 ms

Target: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9

Tone: high (go, 75%)

or low (no-go, 25%)

Odd – Even

2

Rn

Odd - Even

Target (+ Tone)

1,000 ms

Cue (+ Tone)

600 ms

Rn - 1

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide71

Results

  • large effect of TTI

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

(Los & Van der Burg, in preparation)

slide72

Results

  • large effect of TTI
  • short TTI, responsen - 1: no-go
  • - no switch costs
  • - RT is relatively long

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

(Los & Van der Burg, in preparation)

slide73

Results

  • large effect of TTI
  • short TTI, responsen - 1: no-go
  • - no switch costs
  • - RT is relatively long
  • long TTI , responsen - 1: no-go
  • - no switch costs
  • - RT is relatively fast

Zorro’s dual strike…..!?

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

(Los & Van der Burg, in preparation)

slide74

Conclusions

Decision whether

to respond

Response selection

Trial Type

Responsen - 1

TTI

1. Confirmation the additional stage hypothesis

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

(Los & Van der Burg, in preparation)

slide75

Conclusions

Decision whether

to respond

Response selection

Trial Type

Responsen - 1

TTI

1. Confirmation the additional stage hypothesis

2. Residual switch costs are caused by task set competition

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide76

General Conclusions

  • Common principles may govern task control in single and dual-task settings.
  • inhibitory control is exerted whenever conflicting responses are simultaneously activated.
  • consequences of inhibition carry over from one trial to the next.

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide77

The sign of

orro

Thank you!

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide78

Results

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

(Los & Van der Burg, in preparation)

slide79

Conclusions

Responsen - 1

Motor

processing

“whether”

decision

Response selection

Trial Type

TTIn

TTIn - 1

1. Confirmation the additional stage hypothesis.

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie

slide80

Conclusions

Responsen - 1

Motor

processing

“whether”

decision

Response selection

Trial Type

TTIn

TTIn - 1

1. Confirmation the additional stage hypothesis.

2. Switch costs are caused by task set competition

vrijeUniversiteitamsterdam

Cognitieve Psychologie