Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29926170›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2020

Modality compatibility biases voluntary choice of response modality in task switching.

Edina Fintor, Edita Poljac, Denise N Stephan, Iring Koch

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Edina FintorInstitute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University, Jägerstrasse 17-19, 52066, Aachen, Germany. Edina.Fintor@psych.rwth-aachen.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0280-251X
Edita PoljacUniversity of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Denise N StephanInstitute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University, Jägerstrasse 17-19, 52066, Aachen, Germany.
Iring KochInstitute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University, Jägerstrasse 17-19, 52066, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft KO 2045/19-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The term modality compatibility refers to the similarity between stimulus modality and the modality of response-related sensory consequences (e.g., vocal responses produce auditory effects). The previous results showed smaller task-switching costs when participants switched between modality compatible tasks (auditory-vocal and visual-manual) compared to switching between modality incompatible tasks (auditory-manual and visual-vocal). In the present study using a voluntary task-switching paradigm (VTS), participants chose the response modality (vocal or manual) to indicate the location of either a visual or an auditory stimulus. We examined whether free task choices were biased by modality compatibility, so that modality compatible tasks are preferred in VTS. The choice probability analysis indicated that participants tended to choose the response modality that is compatible to the stimulus modality. However, participants did not show a preference to repeat a stimulus-response (S-R) modality mapping, but to switch between modality compatibility (i.e., from S-R modality compatible mapping to S-R modality incompatible mapping and vice versa). More interestingly, even though participants freely chose the response modality, modality compatibility still influenced task-switching costs, showing larger costs with modality incompatible mappings. The finding that modality compatibility influenced choice behaviour suggests components of both top-down control and bottom-up effects of selecting a response modality for different stimulus modalities.

Indexed as

Acoustic StimulationChoice BehaviorPhotic StimulationPsychomotor PerformanceVoiceBiasFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultCognitive controlModality compatibilityVoluntary task switching

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.