Suppr超能文献

没有证据表明存在任务切换效应的晚期位点。

No evidence for a late locus of task switch effects.

作者信息

Fiedler Anja, Schröter Hannes, Ulrich Rolf

机构信息

Cognitive and Biological Psychology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.

出版信息

Brain Res. 2009 Feb 9;1253:74-80. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.11.091. Epub 2008 Dec 9.

Abstract

When participants are asked to switch from one task to another, reaction time is longer than in task repetition trials. Current models assume that switch costs are located either at the perceptual stage or at the response selection stage. Contrary to this assumption, Hsieh and Liu ([2005. The nature of switch cost: task set configuration or carry-over effect? Cogn. Brain Res. 22,165-175]) found that task switching affects the response-locked lateralized readiness potential and thus provided evidence for a motor locus of switch costs. We hypothesized that this finding may have been due to methodological artefacts. In order to test this hypothesis, we replicated the experiment by Hsieh and Liu (2005) but avoided some potential methodological artefacts of their study. Our results showed a clear effect of task switching on the stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potential but no effect on the response-locked lateralized readiness potential. Thus, the present study questions the evidence for a late, motor locus of task switch effects but rather indicates a locus at the response selection stage.

摘要

当要求参与者从一项任务切换到另一项任务时,反应时间比任务重复试验中的更长。当前模型假定切换成本要么位于知觉阶段,要么位于反应选择阶段。与这一假定相反,谢和刘([2005年。切换成本的本质:任务集配置还是延续效应?《认知脑研究》22,165 - 175])发现任务切换会影响反应锁定的偏侧化准备电位,从而为切换成本的运动位点提供了证据。我们推测这一发现可能是由于方法学假象所致。为了检验这一推测,我们重复了谢和刘(2005年)的实验,但避免了他们研究中的一些潜在方法学假象。我们的结果显示任务切换对刺激锁定的偏侧化准备电位有明显影响,但对反应锁定的偏侧化准备电位没有影响。因此,本研究对任务切换效应的晚期运动位点的证据提出了质疑,而是表明其位点在反应选择阶段。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验