Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34333697›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2022

No-go trials in task switching: effects on the task-set and task-space level.

Juliane Scheil, Thomas Kleinsorge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Lingering Neural Representations of Past Task Features Adversely Affect Future Behavior.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023
    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

2 authors.

Juliane ScheilLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystraße 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany. scheil@ifado.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2396-764X
Thomas KleinsorgeLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystraße 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SCHE 2004/1-2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A common marker for inhibition processes in task switching are n - 2 repetition costs. The present study aimed at elucidating effects of no-go trials on n - 2 repetition costs. In contrast to the previous studies, no-go trials were associated with only one of the three tasks in the present two experiments. High n - 2 repetition costs occurred if the no-go task had to be executed in trial n - 2, irrespective of whether a response had to be withheld or not. In contrast, no n - 2 repetition costs were visible if the other two tasks were relevant in n - 2. Whereas this n - 2 effect was unaffected by whether participants could reliably exclude a no-go trial or not, effects of no-gos in trial n were determined by this knowledge. The results differ from effects of no-go trials that are not bound to a specific task. It is assumed that the present no-go variation exerted its effect not on the response level, but on the level of task sets, resulting in enhanced salience of the no-go task that leads to higher activation and, as a consequence, to stronger inhibition. The dissociation of the effects on no-gos in trials n - 2 and n as a function of foreknowledge suggests that the balance between activation and inhibition is shifted not only for single trials and tasks, but for the whole task space.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalKnowledgeHumansPsychomotor PerformanceReaction Time

Identifiers

PMID34333697
PMCPMC9090688

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.