首页> 外文期刊>Memory & cognition >Influence of display type and cue format on task-cuing effects: Dissociating switch cost and right-left prevalence effects
【24h】

Influence of display type and cue format on task-cuing effects: Dissociating switch cost and right-left prevalence effects

机译:显示类型和提示格式对任务提示效果的影响:分离开关成本和左右流行率效果

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In previous studies of task switching and of the right-left prevalence effect, researchers have used a procedure in which the stimulus on each trial occurs in one of four quadrants, and responses are made by pressing one of two diagonally arranged response keys. Across these studies, discrepant effects of cuing interval have been reported. These discrepancies need clarification because cue-based preparation effects are frequently interpreted as reflecting cognitive control processes. In Experiment 1, we compared performance with display formats used by Meiran (1996; Meiran, Chorev, & Sapir, 2000; small display, cues located at sides of quadrants and displayed until response) to study task switching and by Proctor and colleagues (Proctor, Koch, & Vu, 2006; large display, cues located at center of display and shown until target onset) to study right-left prevalence. We found a decrease in task-switch cost with increasing cuing interval with the Meiran display, but not with the Proctor display, but the right-left prevalence effect was of similar size for the two display formats and was relatively unaffected by cuing interval. To determine the basis of the discrepant task-switch results, we used small and large displays in Experiments 2 and 3, respectively, with cue type and cue offset varied. With the side cues, the task-switch cost decreased in all cases at the longer cuing interval, but with the centered cues, it decreased only when the display size was small. Thus, the effects of cuing interval on switch costs are sensitive to variations of display characteristics, whereas cuing interval and display characteristics have little influence on the right-left prevalence effect, suggesting that prevalence effect is due to processes that are independent from those producing the switch cost.
机译:在先前的任务切换和左右患病率效应研究中,研究人员使用了一种程序,其中每个试验的刺激均发生在四个象限之一中,并且通过按两个对角排列的响应键之一进行响应。在这些研究中,已经报告了提示间隔的不同影响。这些差异需要澄清,因为基于提示的准备效果经常被解释为反映认知控制过程。在实验1中,我们将性能与Meiran(1996年; Meiran,Chorev和Sapir,2000年;小型显示器,提示位于象限两侧并一直显示到响应)的显示格式进行了比较,以研究任务切换以及Proctor和同事(Proctor ,Koch&Vu,2006;大型显示器,提示位于显示器中心,直到目标开始出现为止)以研究左右患病率。我们发现,随着Meiran显示器(而不是Proctor显示器)的提示间隔增加,任务切换成本降低了,但是两种显示格式的左右患病率大小相似,并且不受提示间隔的影响。为了确定差异任务切换结果的基础,我们分别在实验2和3中使用了大小不同的提示类型的提示显示。对于侧面提示,在较长的提示间隔下,任务切换成本在所有情况下均会降低,但是对于居中提示,仅当显示尺寸较小时,任务切换成本才会降低。因此,提示间隔对开关成本的影响对显示特性的变化很敏感,而提示间隔和显示特性对左右患病率影响很小,这表明患病率影响的过程与产生这种现象的过程无关。转换成本。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号