ArticlePsychological research2025
Does preparation generate the cost of task switching? A recipe for a switch cost after cue-only trials.
Article in Psychological research, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A switch cost can be observed in cued task-switching on trials that follow a cue-only trial, which presents a task cue indicating a task to be performed but does not present a target stimulus to be responded to. This finding has provided important implications as to the source of the performance cost that emerges when switching tasks. However, cue-only trials differ from completed trials (for which the target occurs and is responded to) in several task parameters, and there are a few untested assumptions about a task-switch cost after cue-only trials, which restricted the conditions under which cue-only trials have been used. The present study first examined whether a switch cost emerged after cue-only trials when cue-only trials were matched with completed trials in as many task parameters as possible, and found that an expected switch cost following cue-only trials was absent in response time. In the subsequent six experiments, we explored critical task parameters to obtain a switch cost after cue-only trials. The present results indicate that the use of a short preparation interval was an important factor and that the switch cost was more short-lived and dissipated more quickly after cue-only trials than after completed trials. These outcomes are consistent with the proposal that there are at least two sources of a task-switch cost, one that originates from processing a task cue and another that originates from performing a cued task. Early processes of task preparation (e.g., cue or task identification) may be sufficient to produce the switch cost after cue-only trials, but response-related processes might generate a more persistent switch cost.
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.