scholarly journals Cognitive control during shifts of attention and task-set

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (9) ◽  
pp. 886-886
Author(s):  
Y. C. Chiu ◽  
S. Yantis
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Set ◽  
And Task

Do Young Children Modulate Their Cognitive Control?

2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Solène Ambrosi ◽  
Patrick Lemaire ◽  
Agnès Blaye
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Inhibitory Control ◽  
Age Range ◽  
Stroop Tasks ◽  
And Task

Abstract. Dynamic, trial-by-trial modulations of inhibitory control are well documented in adults but rarely investigated in children. Here, we examined whether 5-to-7 year-old children, an age range when inhibitory control is still partially immature, achieve such modulations. Fifty three children took flanker, Simon, and Stroop tasks. Above and beyond classic congruency effects, the present results showed two crucial findings. First, we found evidence for sequential modulations of congruency effects in these young children in the three conflict tasks. Second, our results showed both task specificities and task commonalities. These findings in young children have important implications as they suggest that, to be modulated, inhibitory control does not require full maturation and that the precise pattern of trial-by-trial modulations may depend on the nature of conflict.

A Review of the Role of Cue Processing in Task Switching

2013 ◽  
Vol 221 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerstin Jost ◽  
Wouter De Baene ◽  
Iring Koch ◽  
Marcel Brass
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Task Switch ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Set Switching ◽  
Controversial Topic ◽  
Cue Encoding ◽  
Cue Processing

The role of cue processing has become a controversial topic in research on cognitive control using task-switching procedures. Some authors suggested a priming account to explain switch costs as a form of encoding benefit when the cue from the previous trial is repeated and hence challenged theories that attribute task-switch costs to task-set (re)configuration. A rich body of empirical evidence has evolved that indeed shows that cue-encoding repetition priming is an important component in task switching. However, these studies also demonstrate that there are usually substantial “true” task-switch costs. Here, we review this behavioral, electrophysiological, and brain imaging evidence. Moreover, we describe alternative approaches to the explicit task-cuing procedure, such as the usage of transition cues or the task-span procedure. In addition, we address issues related to the type of cue, such as cue transparency. We also discuss methodological and theoretical implications and argue that the explicit task-cuing procedure is suitable to address issues of cognitive control and task-set switching.

scholarly journals No-go trials in task switching: effects on the task-set and task-space level

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliane Scheil ◽  
Thomas Kleinsorge
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
The Other ◽  
Specific Task ◽  
Task Space ◽  
Response Level ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Common Marker ◽  
Task Sets ◽  
And Task

AbstractA common marker for inhibition processes in task switching are n − 2 repetition costs. The present study aimed at elucidating effects of no-go trials on n − 2 repetition costs. In contrast to the previous studies, no-go trials were associated with only one of the three tasks in the present two experiments. High n − 2 repetition costs occurred if the no-go task had to be executed in trial n − 2, irrespective of whether a response had to be withheld or not. In contrast, no n − 2 repetition costs were visible if the other two tasks were relevant in n − 2. Whereas this n − 2 effect was unaffected by whether participants could reliably exclude a no-go trial or not, effects of no-gos in trial n were determined by this knowledge. The results differ from effects of no-go trials that are not bound to a specific task. It is assumed that the present no-go variation exerted its effect not on the response level, but on the level of task sets, resulting in enhanced salience of the no-go task that leads to higher activation and, as a consequence, to stronger inhibition. The dissociation of the effects on no-gos in trials n − 2 and n as a function of foreknowledge suggests that the balance between activation and inhibition is shifted not only for single trials and tasks, but for the whole task space.

scholarly journals Cognitive control over learning: Creating, clustering, and generalizing task-set structure.

2013 ◽  
Vol 120 (1) ◽  
pp. 190-229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne G. E. Collins ◽  
Michael J. Frank
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Set

Contributions of Brain Function and Structure to Three Different Domains of Cognitive Control in Normal Aging

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Jenny R. Rieck ◽  
Giulia Baracchini ◽  
Cheryl L. Grady
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Task Performance ◽  
Brain Structure ◽  
Functional Activity ◽  
Brain Activity ◽  
Diffusion Imaging ◽  
Normal Aging ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
And Task

Cognitive control involves the flexible allocation of mental resources during goal-directed behavior and comprises three correlated but distinct domains—inhibition, shifting, and working memory. The work of Don Stuss and others has demonstrated that frontal and parietal cortices are crucial to cognitive control, particularly in normal aging, which is characterized by reduced control mechanisms. However, the structure–function relationships specific to each domain and subsequent impact on performance are not well understood. In the current study, we examined both age and individual differences in functional activity associated with core domains of cognitive control in relation to fronto-parietal structure and task performance. Participants ( N = 140, aged 20–86 years) completed three fMRI tasks: go/no-go (inhibition), task switching (shifting), and n-back (working memory), in addition to structural and diffusion imaging. All three tasks engaged a common set of fronto-parietal regions; however, the contributions of age, brain structure, and task performance to functional activity were unique to each domain. Aging was associated with differences in functional activity for all tasks, largely in regions outside common fronto-parietal control regions. Shifting and inhibition showed greater contributions of structure to overall decreases in brain activity, suggesting that more intact fronto-parietal structure may serve as a scaffold for efficient functional response. Working memory showed no contribution of structure to functional activity but had strong effects of age and task performance. Together, these results provide a comprehensive and novel examination of the joint contributions of aging, performance, and brain structure to functional activity across multiple domains of cognitive control.

Parallelizing Compiler Translation Validation Using Happens-Before and Task-Set

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jixin Han ◽  
Tomofumi Yuki ◽  
Michelle Mills Strout ◽  
Dan Umeda ◽  
Hironori Kasahara ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Parallelizing Compiler ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Translation Validation ◽  
And Task

Defining Human Capability from Soldier and Task Data

2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 791-795 ◽  
Author(s):  
Holly A. H. Handley
Keyword(s):  
Reference Data ◽  
Task Set ◽  
Human System ◽  
Human Capability ◽  
Main Components ◽  
And Task

The Soldier-Equipment-Task (SET) Framework identifies the three main components of a soldier system and the relationships between them. The human focused data collected by the Human Viewpoint during the system architecting phase can be used as initial reference data for the SET Framework. The Solder (or Human) Capability relationship is defined in the SET Framework between the Soldier and Task Components; this is where the majority of the Human Viewpoint data resides. This paper provides a mapping of the Human Viewpoint data to the SET Framework and develops a methodology to evaluate the Soldier-Task Human Capability relationship for use in Soldier System or other human system focused analyses.

Important determinations: Attention and task set.

2006 ◽  
pp. 445-454
Author(s):  
Louis Benjamin Hoisington
Keyword(s):  
Task Set ◽  
And Task
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document