Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40691676›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2026

No congruency sequence effect across Simon and Eriksen tasks with aligned temporal processing dynamics: Evidence for domain-specific over domain-general cognitive control.

Daniel Bratzke, Ruben Ellinghaus, Ian Mackenzie, Victor Mittelstädt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Daniel BratzkeDepartment of Psychology, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany. bratzke@uni-bremen.de.
Ruben EllinghausDepartment of General Psychology: Judgment, Decision Making, Action, Faculty of Psychology, University of Hagen (FernUniversität in Hagen), Hagen, Germany.
Ian MackenzieDepartment of Psychology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Victor MittelstädtDepartment of Psychology, Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies have shown that the congruency sequence effect (CSE) is usually domain-specific, that is, no transfer across different conflict tasks is observed. The goal of the present study was to test whether the lack of a CSE transfer across the Simon and Eriksen flanker tasks can be explained by a confound of conflict type and the temporal dynamics of conflict processing (i.e., the temporal overlap of target and distractor processing). By presenting the target in the Eriksen task before the distractors, we were able to largely align the temporal overlap of distractor-to-target processing (as indexed by delta plots) in the Simon and Eriksen tasks. Nevertheless, across four experiments we found little, if any, evidence for a transfer of the CSE across tasks. Overall, the results demonstrate that cognitive control is highly specific to the type of conflict, even when controlling for the temporal dynamics of conflict processing.

Indexed as

AttentionConflict, PsychologicalExecutive FunctionPsychomotor PerformanceTransfer, PsychologyAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultCognitive controlCongruency sequence effectSelective attention

Identifiers

PMID40691676
PMCPMC12956923

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.