Learning to be in control involves response-specific mechanisms

Conflict adaptation refers to our ability to modulate our attention in line with changing situational demands, so we can engage in goal-directed behavior. While there is ample evidence demonstrating that such adaptation in conflict tasks can be captured using different response modalities, it remain...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Attention, perception & psychophysics perception & psychophysics, 2019-10, Vol.81 (7), p.2526-2537
Hauptverfasser: Ruitenberg, Marit F. L., Braem, S., Du Cheyne, H., Notebaert, W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2537
container_issue 7
container_start_page 2526
container_title Attention, perception & psychophysics
container_volume 81
creator Ruitenberg, Marit F. L.
Braem, S.
Du Cheyne, H.
Notebaert, W.
description Conflict adaptation refers to our ability to modulate our attention in line with changing situational demands, so we can engage in goal-directed behavior. While there is ample evidence demonstrating that such adaptation in conflict tasks can be captured using different response modalities, it remains unknown whether these effects rely on domain-general mechanisms applied to different response modalities, or are the result of more inherently response-specific processes. Here, we used an individual-differences approach to evaluate whether conflict adaptation in two highly similar tasks using different response modalities are related. Specifically, participants performed two versions of a Stroop task, one in which they responded via key presses and one in which they responded via mouse movements. In both tasks, we manipulated the item-specific proportion of (in)congruent trials (80% vs. 20% congruent). This allowed us to evaluate the item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) effect, a hallmark indicator of conflict adaptation. ISPC effects were observed in both response modalities. However, we found no indications that individual differences in the ISPC effects of the two response modalities were related. This raises the question whether findings from studies on conflict adaptation measured by different modalities can reliably be compared. Furthermore, these results suggest that response modality plays a more integrative role in these adaptive processes, rather than being the mere output of a domain-general control mechanism. This is consistent with contingency learning accounts of the ISPC effect and associative learning models of cognitive control.
doi_str_mv 10.3758/s13414-019-01753-0
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2231947418</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2231947418</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-6fc97edf7c7906cd19f06a30db3f4cdf76018c2163522b3b6b6c13cc38dc87413</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj16qSaebNicR8QsWvCh4C-00Xbu0Sc20C_57o1336GGYIXnmhXkYOxf8CrJlfk0CUpHGXKhQ2RJifsDmQqUQg4L3w_2ciBk7IdpwLkFm_JjNQPAMVKrm7GZlCm8bu44GF5UmamyEzg7etWHcunZrKPKGemfJxNQbbOoGo87gR2Eb6uiUHdVFS-Zs1xfs7eH-9e4pXr08Pt_drmIEJYZY1qgyU9UZZopLrISquSyAVyXUKYZ3yUWOiZCwTJISSllKFIAIeYV5lgpYsMspt_fuczQ06K4hNG1bWONG0kkC4dpA5gFNJhS9I_Km1r1vusJ_acH1jzg9idNBnP4Vp3lYutjlj2Vnqv3Kn6kAwARQ-LJr4_XGjd6Gm_-L_QYuY3j6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2231947418</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Learning to be in control involves response-specific mechanisms</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L. ; Braem, S. ; Du Cheyne, H. ; Notebaert, W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L. ; Braem, S. ; Du Cheyne, H. ; Notebaert, W.</creatorcontrib><description>Conflict adaptation refers to our ability to modulate our attention in line with changing situational demands, so we can engage in goal-directed behavior. While there is ample evidence demonstrating that such adaptation in conflict tasks can be captured using different response modalities, it remains unknown whether these effects rely on domain-general mechanisms applied to different response modalities, or are the result of more inherently response-specific processes. Here, we used an individual-differences approach to evaluate whether conflict adaptation in two highly similar tasks using different response modalities are related. Specifically, participants performed two versions of a Stroop task, one in which they responded via key presses and one in which they responded via mouse movements. In both tasks, we manipulated the item-specific proportion of (in)congruent trials (80% vs. 20% congruent). This allowed us to evaluate the item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) effect, a hallmark indicator of conflict adaptation. ISPC effects were observed in both response modalities. However, we found no indications that individual differences in the ISPC effects of the two response modalities were related. This raises the question whether findings from studies on conflict adaptation measured by different modalities can reliably be compared. Furthermore, these results suggest that response modality plays a more integrative role in these adaptive processes, rather than being the mere output of a domain-general control mechanism. This is consistent with contingency learning accounts of the ISPC effect and associative learning models of cognitive control.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1943-3921</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-393X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3758/s13414-019-01753-0</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31073949</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Attention - physiology ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Cognitive Psychology ; Female ; Humans ; Learning - physiology ; Male ; Photic Stimulation - methods ; Psychology ; Reaction Time - immunology ; Stroop Test ; Time for Action: Reaching for a Better Understanding of the Dynamics of Cognition ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Attention, perception &amp; psychophysics, 2019-10, Vol.81 (7), p.2526-2537</ispartof><rights>The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-6fc97edf7c7906cd19f06a30db3f4cdf76018c2163522b3b6b6c13cc38dc87413</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-6fc97edf7c7906cd19f06a30db3f4cdf76018c2163522b3b6b6c13cc38dc87413</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/s13414-019-01753-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13414-019-01753-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31073949$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braem, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Du Cheyne, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Notebaert, W.</creatorcontrib><title>Learning to be in control involves response-specific mechanisms</title><title>Attention, perception &amp; psychophysics</title><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><description>Conflict adaptation refers to our ability to modulate our attention in line with changing situational demands, so we can engage in goal-directed behavior. While there is ample evidence demonstrating that such adaptation in conflict tasks can be captured using different response modalities, it remains unknown whether these effects rely on domain-general mechanisms applied to different response modalities, or are the result of more inherently response-specific processes. Here, we used an individual-differences approach to evaluate whether conflict adaptation in two highly similar tasks using different response modalities are related. Specifically, participants performed two versions of a Stroop task, one in which they responded via key presses and one in which they responded via mouse movements. In both tasks, we manipulated the item-specific proportion of (in)congruent trials (80% vs. 20% congruent). This allowed us to evaluate the item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) effect, a hallmark indicator of conflict adaptation. ISPC effects were observed in both response modalities. However, we found no indications that individual differences in the ISPC effects of the two response modalities were related. This raises the question whether findings from studies on conflict adaptation measured by different modalities can reliably be compared. Furthermore, these results suggest that response modality plays a more integrative role in these adaptive processes, rather than being the mere output of a domain-general control mechanism. This is consistent with contingency learning accounts of the ISPC effect and associative learning models of cognitive control.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Attention - physiology</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Learning - physiology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Photic Stimulation - methods</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reaction Time - immunology</subject><subject>Stroop Test</subject><subject>Time for Action: Reaching for a Better Understanding of the Dynamics of Cognition</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1943-3921</issn><issn>1943-393X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj16qSaebNicR8QsWvCh4C-00Xbu0Sc20C_57o1336GGYIXnmhXkYOxf8CrJlfk0CUpHGXKhQ2RJifsDmQqUQg4L3w_2ciBk7IdpwLkFm_JjNQPAMVKrm7GZlCm8bu44GF5UmamyEzg7etWHcunZrKPKGemfJxNQbbOoGo87gR2Eb6uiUHdVFS-Zs1xfs7eH-9e4pXr08Pt_drmIEJYZY1qgyU9UZZopLrISquSyAVyXUKYZ3yUWOiZCwTJISSllKFIAIeYV5lgpYsMspt_fuczQ06K4hNG1bWONG0kkC4dpA5gFNJhS9I_Km1r1vusJ_acH1jzg9idNBnP4Vp3lYutjlj2Vnqv3Kn6kAwARQ-LJr4_XGjd6Gm_-L_QYuY3j6</recordid><startdate>20191001</startdate><enddate>20191001</enddate><creator>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L.</creator><creator>Braem, S.</creator><creator>Du Cheyne, H.</creator><creator>Notebaert, W.</creator><general>Springer US</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191001</creationdate><title>Learning to be in control involves response-specific mechanisms</title><author>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L. ; Braem, S. ; Du Cheyne, H. ; Notebaert, W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c391t-6fc97edf7c7906cd19f06a30db3f4cdf76018c2163522b3b6b6c13cc38dc87413</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Attention - physiology</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Learning - physiology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Photic Stimulation - methods</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reaction Time - immunology</topic><topic>Stroop Test</topic><topic>Time for Action: Reaching for a Better Understanding of the Dynamics of Cognition</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Braem, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Du Cheyne, H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Notebaert, W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Attention, perception &amp; psychophysics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ruitenberg, Marit F. L.</au><au>Braem, S.</au><au>Du Cheyne, H.</au><au>Notebaert, W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Learning to be in control involves response-specific mechanisms</atitle><jtitle>Attention, perception &amp; psychophysics</jtitle><stitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</stitle><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><date>2019-10-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>81</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>2526</spage><epage>2537</epage><pages>2526-2537</pages><issn>1943-3921</issn><eissn>1943-393X</eissn><abstract>Conflict adaptation refers to our ability to modulate our attention in line with changing situational demands, so we can engage in goal-directed behavior. While there is ample evidence demonstrating that such adaptation in conflict tasks can be captured using different response modalities, it remains unknown whether these effects rely on domain-general mechanisms applied to different response modalities, or are the result of more inherently response-specific processes. Here, we used an individual-differences approach to evaluate whether conflict adaptation in two highly similar tasks using different response modalities are related. Specifically, participants performed two versions of a Stroop task, one in which they responded via key presses and one in which they responded via mouse movements. In both tasks, we manipulated the item-specific proportion of (in)congruent trials (80% vs. 20% congruent). This allowed us to evaluate the item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) effect, a hallmark indicator of conflict adaptation. ISPC effects were observed in both response modalities. However, we found no indications that individual differences in the ISPC effects of the two response modalities were related. This raises the question whether findings from studies on conflict adaptation measured by different modalities can reliably be compared. Furthermore, these results suggest that response modality plays a more integrative role in these adaptive processes, rather than being the mere output of a domain-general control mechanism. This is consistent with contingency learning accounts of the ISPC effect and associative learning models of cognitive control.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>31073949</pmid><doi>10.3758/s13414-019-01753-0</doi><tpages>12</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1943-3921
ispartof Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2019-10, Vol.81 (7), p.2526-2537
issn 1943-3921
1943-393X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2231947418
source MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Adolescent
Attention - physiology
Behavioral Science and Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Female
Humans
Learning - physiology
Male
Photic Stimulation - methods
Psychology
Reaction Time - immunology
Stroop Test
Time for Action: Reaching for a Better Understanding of the Dynamics of Cognition
Young Adult
title Learning to be in control involves response-specific mechanisms
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T08%3A35%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Learning%20to%20be%20in%20control%20involves%20response-specific%20mechanisms&rft.jtitle=Attention,%20perception%20&%20psychophysics&rft.au=Ruitenberg,%20Marit%20F.%20L.&rft.date=2019-10-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=2526&rft.epage=2537&rft.pages=2526-2537&rft.issn=1943-3921&rft.eissn=1943-393X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3758/s13414-019-01753-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2231947418%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2231947418&rft_id=info:pmid/31073949&rfr_iscdi=true