ArticleCognitive processing2025
Predictive alternating runs and random task-switching sequences produce dissociative switch costs in the Consonant-Vowel/Odd-Even task.
Article in Cognitive processing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 is commonly used to investigate working memory and attentional control processes. The current study compares predictive versus non-predictive task-sequencing effects on task-switching performance. Participants completed four blocks of the Consonant-Vowel/Odd-Even (CVOE) task: Two single task pure blocks, a predictable switch block where task switching occurred every two trials, and a random switch block where switching was unpredictable. In addition to mean error rates and response times (RTs), we assessed sequence effects on local switch costs (i.e., switch vs. nonswitch trials) and global costs (i.e., nonswitch vs. pure trials) for both error rates and RTs along with their underlying distributions. Overall, we show that while predictive and random switching produced similar patterns for mean error rates and RTs, a dissociation occurred in RT switch costs. When switching was random, local costs were inflated. In contrast, predictive switching increased global costs. Increased local costs for random versus predictive switching reflect an increase in task-set reconfiguration processes as participants struggle to reconfigure to an unpredictable task type in working memory on a subsequent trial. Separately, increased global costs for predictive switching reflect declines in task-set maintenance processes, as participants must maintain both task types in working memory while simultaneously monitoring their progress through the trial sequencing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39455504What 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.