ArticleMemory & cognition2019
Cross-modal transfer after auditory task-switching training.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effects of Single-Bout Exercise Interventions with Different Exercise Modalities on Executive Function in Youths.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Transfer of working memory training to the inhibitory control of auditory distraction.Psychological research · 2021Article
- Cross-Modal Transfer Following Auditory Task-Switching Training in Old Adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
- Is Recognition of Speech in Noise Related to Memory Disruption Caused by Irrelevant Sound?Trends in hearingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Task-switching training was shown to improve performance not only for the trained tasks (i.e., reduced performance costs resulting from the task switches), but also for structurally similar (near transfer) or even dissimilar tasks (far transfer). However, it is still unclear whether the improvement is specific to the trained input modality or whether cognitive control occurs at an amodal processing level enabling transfer of set-shifting abilities to different input modalities. In this study, training and transfer was assessed for an auditory task-switching paradigm in which spoken words from different semantic categories were presented dichotically requiring participants to switch between two auditory categorization tasks. Cross-modal transfer of task-switching training was assessed in terms of the performance costs in a visual task-switching situation using tasks that were structurally similar to the trained tasks. The 4-day training significantly reduced the costs resulting from mixing the two auditory tasks, as compared to both an active (auditory single-task training) and a passive control group (no training). More importantly, the auditory task-switching training was also found to reduce the mixing costs for untrained visual tasks, indicating cross-modal transfer. This finding suggests that the improvement resulting from task-switching training is not specific to the trained stimulus modality, but it seems to be driven by a cognitive control mechanism operating at an amodal processing level. The training did not reveal any far-transfer effects to working memory, inhibition, or fluid intelligence, suggesting that the modality-independent enhancement of set-shifting does not generalize to other cognitive control functions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30805872What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.