ArticleMemory & cognition2024
Inhibition during task switching is affected by the number of competing tasks.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of take-over cue informativity in interrupted take-over requests in a semi-automated driving scenario.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Inhibition of cued but not executed task sets depends on cue-task compatibility and practice.Psychological research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inhibition during task switching is assumed to be indexed by n - 2 repetition costs-that is, performance costs when the task in the current trial equals the task in trial n - 2 (sequences of type ABA) compared with two consecutive switches to another task each (sequences CBA). The present study examined effects of a short-term reduction of the number of candidate tasks on these costs. For this purpose, a variant of the task switching paradigm was used in which in half of the trials, a precue that preceded the task cue allowed for a short-term reduction of the number of candidate tasks. In Experiment 1, one out of three tasks could be excluded. In Experiment 2, one or two out of four tasks could be excluded. Experiment 3 served as control condition using the standard cueing paradigm. Significant n - 2 repetition costs were present with three candidate tasks. In contrast, no costs were visible when the number of candidate tasks was reduced to two. This result is interpreted in terms of a task selection mechanism based on antagonistic constraints among task representations, which operates on a rather superficial level when switching among only two tasks, thereby reducing the need for inhibition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.