Cargando…

Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict

Congruency effects in distracter interference tasks are often smaller after incongruent trials than after congruent trials. However, the sources of such congruency sequence effects (CSEs) are controversial. The conflict monitoring model of cognitive control links CSEs to the detection and resolution...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weissman, Daniel H., Carp, Joshua
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3761159/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24027550
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00587
_version_ 1782282840332828672
author Weissman, Daniel H.
Carp, Joshua
author_facet Weissman, Daniel H.
Carp, Joshua
author_sort Weissman, Daniel H.
collection PubMed
description Congruency effects in distracter interference tasks are often smaller after incongruent trials than after congruent trials. However, the sources of such congruency sequence effects (CSEs) are controversial. The conflict monitoring model of cognitive control links CSEs to the detection and resolution of response conflict. In contrast, competing theories attribute CSEs to attentional or affective processes that vary with previous-trial congruency (incongruent vs. congruent). The present study sought to distinguish between conflict monitoring and congruency-based accounts of CSEs. To this end, we determined whether CSEs are driven by previous-trial reaction time (RT)—a putative measure of response conflict—or by previous-trial congruency. In two experiments using a face-word Stroop task (n = 49), we found that current-trial congruency effects did not vary with previous-trial RT independent of previous-trial congruency. In contrast, current-trial congruency effects were influenced by previous-trial congruency independent of previous-trial RT. These findings appear more consistent with theories that attribute CSEs to non-conflict processes whose recruitment varies with previous-trial congruency than with theories that link CSEs to previous-trial response conflict.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3761159
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-37611592013-09-11 Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict Weissman, Daniel H. Carp, Joshua Front Psychol Psychology Congruency effects in distracter interference tasks are often smaller after incongruent trials than after congruent trials. However, the sources of such congruency sequence effects (CSEs) are controversial. The conflict monitoring model of cognitive control links CSEs to the detection and resolution of response conflict. In contrast, competing theories attribute CSEs to attentional or affective processes that vary with previous-trial congruency (incongruent vs. congruent). The present study sought to distinguish between conflict monitoring and congruency-based accounts of CSEs. To this end, we determined whether CSEs are driven by previous-trial reaction time (RT)—a putative measure of response conflict—or by previous-trial congruency. In two experiments using a face-word Stroop task (n = 49), we found that current-trial congruency effects did not vary with previous-trial RT independent of previous-trial congruency. In contrast, current-trial congruency effects were influenced by previous-trial congruency independent of previous-trial RT. These findings appear more consistent with theories that attribute CSEs to non-conflict processes whose recruitment varies with previous-trial congruency than with theories that link CSEs to previous-trial response conflict. Frontiers Media S.A. 2013-09-04 /pmc/articles/PMC3761159/ /pubmed/24027550 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00587 Text en Copyright © 2013 Weissman and Carp. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Weissman, Daniel H.
Carp, Joshua
Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
title Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
title_full Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
title_fullStr Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
title_full_unstemmed Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
title_short Congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
title_sort congruency sequence effects are driven by previous-trial congruency, not previous-trial response conflict
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3761159/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24027550
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00587
work_keys_str_mv AT weissmandanielh congruencysequenceeffectsaredrivenbyprevioustrialcongruencynotprevioustrialresponseconflict
AT carpjoshua congruencysequenceeffectsaredrivenbyprevioustrialcongruencynotprevioustrialresponseconflict