The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting

Response selection in task shifting was explored using a go/no-go methodology. The no-go signal occurred unpredictably with stimulus onset so that all trials required task preparation but only go trials required response selection. Experiment 1 showed that shift costs were absent after no-go trials, indicating that response processes are crucial for shift costs. In Experiment 2, backward inhibition was absent after no-go trials. Experiments 3 and 4 demonstrated that response selection, rather than execution, causes backward inhibition. All 4 experiments showed effects of preparation time in go trials, suggesting that advance preparation must have also occurred in no-go trials. The authors concluded that inhibition of irrelevant task sets arises only at response selection and that residual shift costs reflect such persisting inhibition.     

No-go trials can modulate switch cost by interfering with effects of task preparation

It has recently been shown that the cost associated with switching tasks is eliminated following ‘no-go’ trials, in which response selection is not completed, suggesting that the switch cost depends on response selection. However, no-go trials may also affect switch costs by interfering with the effects of task preparation that precede response selection. To test this hypothesis we evaluated switch costs following standard go trials with those following two types of non-response trials: no-go trials, for which a stimulus is presented that indicates no response should be made (Experiment 1); and cue-only trials in which no stimulus is presented following the task cue (Experiment 2). We hypothesized that eliminating no-go stimuli would reveal effects of task preparation on the switch cost in cue-only trials. We found no switch cost following no-go trials (Experiment 1), but a reliable switch cost in cue-only trials (i.e., when no-go stimuli were removed; Experiment 2). We conclude that no-go trials can modulate the switch cost, independent of their effect on response selection, by interfering with task preparation, and that the effects of task preparation on switch cost are more directly assessed by cue-only trials.     

Response selection and response execution in task switching: evidence from a go-signal paradigm

The present study used a go/no-go signal delay (GSD) to explore the role of response-related processes in task switching. A go/no-go signal was presented at either 100 ms or 1,500 ms after the stimulus. Participants were encouraged to use the GSD for response selection and preparation. The data indicate that the opportunity to select and prepare a response (i.e., long GSD) resulted in a substantial reduction of task-shift costs (Experiment 1) and n-2 task-repetition costs (i.e., backward inhibition; Experiment 2) in the current trial. These results suggest that interference from the preceding trial can be resolved during response selection and preparation. Furthermore, the shift costs and the n-2 repetition costs after no-go trials with long GSD (i.e., response selection but no execution) were markedly smaller than after go trials. These findings suggest that the interference that gives rise to shift costs and n-2 repetition costs is related not solely to response selection but also to response execution. Thus, the present study demonstrates dissociable contributions of response selection and response execution to interference effects in task switching.     

Preparation for a forthcoming task is sufficient to produce subsequent shift costs

Shifting from one task to another is associated with significant costs. Recently, it has been questioned whether the mere preparation for a forthcoming task, without the task’s actually being executed, is sufficient to establish a new task set that results in shift costs when the execution of a task other than the prepared task is required. In a go/no-go study, it is shown that the mere preparation for a task is sufficient to produce shift costs, but only under conditions that encourage participants to engage in advance preparation for a precued task despite the possibility that the execution of this task will not always be required, because of occasional no-go trials. In addition, considerable reductions of shift costs after go trials could be observed under these conditions. When such a motivating context was not provided, only negligible shift costs were observed after a no-go trial, indicating that no task-set configuration had taken place without the need to perform the task. Furthermore, under these conditions, prolonging the preparation interval resulted in reaction time benefits that were similar for task shifts and repetitions, again indicating that no active task-set configuration took place.     

Attention and gaze shifting in dual-task and go/no-go performance with vocal responding

Evidence from go/no-go performance on the Eriksen flanker task with manual responding suggests that individuals gaze at stimuli just as long as needed to identify them (e.g., Sanders, 1998). In contrast, evidence from dual-task performance with vocal responding suggests that gaze shifts occur after response selection (e.g., Roelofs, 2008a). This difference in results may be due to the nature of the task situation (go/no-go vs. dual task) or the response modality (manual vs. vocal). We examined this by having participants vocally respond to congruent and incongruent flanker stimuli and shift gaze to left- or right-pointing arrows. The arrows required a manual response (dual task) or determined whether the vocal response to the flanker stimuli had to be given or not (go/no-go). Vocal response and gaze shift latencies were longer on incongruent than congruent trials in both dual-task and go/no-go performance. The flanker effect was also present in the manual response latencies in dual-task performance. Ex-Gaussian analyses revealed that the flanker effect on the gaze shifts consisted of a shift of the entire latency distribution. These results suggest that gaze shifts occur after response selection in both dual-task and go/no-go performance with vocal responding.     

Conditions under which children experience inhibitory difficulty with a "button-press" go/no-go task

Go/no-go tasks seem to provide a simple marker of inhibitory development in young children. Children are told to respond to one stimulus on go trials but to make no response to another stimulus on no-go trials; responding on no-go trials is assumed to reflect a failure to inhibit the go response. However, there is evidence to suggest that a type of go/no-go task, which we call the "button-press" task, does not require inhibition. We investigated the conditions under which young children (M=3 years 6 months, N=120) experience inhibitory difficulty with this type of task. The data suggest that the speed of stimulus presentation is crucial and that other studies using this type of task have presented the stimuli too briefly. The importance of establishing the inhibitory credentials of a task before it is used as a marker of inhibitory control is emphasized.     

Response retrieval in a go/no-go priming-of-popout task

Priming of popout is the finding that singleton search is faster when features of a target and of nontargets are repeated across trials than when the features switch. Theoretical accounts suggest that intertrial repetition influences perceptual and attentional selection processes, episodic retrieval processes, or both. The present study combined a popout search task with a go/no-go task. In Experiment 1, the nontarget distractors in each display carried the go/no-go feature, and in Experiment 2, the texture of all items carried the go/no-go feature. Results showed that the go/no-go task moderated the intertrial repetition effects. In Experiment 1, the target color elicited retrieval of the preceding distractor color and associated no-go response, resulting in larger interference effects. In Experiment 2, the target color elicited retrieval of the preceding target color and no-go response, resulting in reduced facilitation effects. Additional results from both experiments showed that the colors in a search display also influenced target selection on the following trial. Taken together, the results of both experiments suggest that intertrial repetition influences both early selection and postselection retrieval processes.     

An electrophysiological study of the insertion of overt response choice

Using electrophysiological measures, the authors studied changes in prestimulus state, stimulus identification, and response-related processing when, in a go/no-go task, forced choice between 2 overt go responses was inserted. The authors observed decreased prestimulus motor preparation (electromyogram), no change in stimulus identification time (selection negativity), a minor increase in response selection time (lateralized readiness potential), a large increase in response preparation time (lateralized readiness potential), a minor effect on response execution time (electromyogram), and a decrease in the activation of a response-inhibition process on no-go trials (frontal event-related potential). The existence of the response-inhibition process was verified by the presence of inverted lateralized readiness potentials on no-go trials. Pure insertion of response choice in a task seems impossible because the choice between activation and inhibition (go/no-go) always seems already present.     

The go/no-go priming task: automatic evaluation and categorisation beyond response interference

The response-window version of a go/no-go (GNG) response priming task is introduced using both evaluative (Experiment 1) and animacy decision (Experiment 2). In each trial a cue indicates which target category should lead to a key-press. The target is preceded by either a congruent or incongruent prime. The standard priming task was added as well. Both tasks yielded robust priming effects. However, they differed regarding a signature of response activation paradigms, that is, the Gratton effect (i.e. smaller priming effects following incongruent trials compared to congruent trials), which is present in the standard task but absent in the GNG task. This indicates that effects found with the GNG task are caused by different processes compared to the standard task. Experiment 3 tested an alternative account to explain priming effects in the GNG task. By manipulating response biases, Experiment 3 provides evidence for this account.     

Elimination of the enhanced Simon effect for older adults in a three-choice situation: Ageing and the Simon effect in a go/no-go Simon task

In a Simon task, participants show better performance when the irrelevant stimulus location corresponds with the response location than when it does not, and this effect is typically greater for older adults than for younger adults. To study the effect of cognitive ageing in the Simon task, we compared young and old adults using two versions of the Simon task: (a) a standard visual Simon task, for which participants respond with left and right key-presses to the red and green colours of stimuli presented in left and right locations; (b) a go/no-go version of the Simon task, which was basically the same, except that the shape of the stimulus in one third of the trials indicates that no response is to be made. In both tasks, both age groups showed the Simon effect. The magnitude of the effect for the standard Simon task was greater for the older adults than for the younger adults. Nevertheless, the two groups showed an equivalent Simon effect in the go/no-go version of the Simon task. Reaction time distribution analyses revealed basically similar functions for both age groups: a decreasing pattern of the Simon effect in the standard task and an increasing pattern of the effect in the go/no-go version of the task. The results suggest that older adults find it more difficult to suppress an automatic activation of the corresponding response, though this automatic activation was reduced in situations where the response was frequently inhibited.     

Stop what you are not doing! Emotional pictures interfere with the task not to respond

Previous research has shown that emotional stimuli interfere with ongoing activities. One explanation is that these stimuli draw attention away from the primary task and thereby hamper the correct execution of the task. Another explanation is that emotional stimuli cause a temporary freezing of all ongoing activity. We used a go/ no-go task to differentiate between these accounts. According to the attention account, emotional distractors should impair performance on both go and no-go trials. According to the freezing account, the presentation of emotional stimuli should be detrimental to performance on go trials, but beneficial for performance on no-go trials. Our findings confirm the former prediction: Pictures high in emotional arousal impaired performance on no-go trials.     

Electrophysiological correlates of anterior cingulate function in a go/no-go task: Effects of response conflict and trial type frequency

Neuroimaging and computational modeling studies have led to the suggestion that response conflict monitoring by the anterior cingulate cortex plays a key role in cognitive control. For example, response conflict is high when a response must be withheld (no-go) in contexts in which there is a prepotent tendency to make an overt (go) response. An event-related brain potential (ERP) component, the N2, is more pronounced on no-go than on go trials and was previously thought to reflect the need to inhibit the go response. However, the N2 may instead reflect the high degree of response conflict on no-go trials. If so, an N2 should also be apparent when subjects make a go response in conditions in which nogo events are more common. To test this hypothesis, we collected high-density ERP data from subjects performing a go/no-go task, in which the relative frequency of go versus no-go stimuli was varied. Consistent with our hypothesis, an N2 was apparent on both go and no-go trials and showed the properties expected of an ERP measure of conflict detection on correct trials: (1) It was enhanced for low-frequency stimuli, irrespective of whether these stimuli were associated with generating or suppressing a response, and (2) it was localized to the anterior cingulate cortex. This suggests that previous conceptions of the no-go N2 as indexing response inhibition may be in need of revision. Instead, the results are consistent with the view that the N2 in go/no-go tasks reflects conflict arising from competition between the execution and the inhibition of a single response.     

Eye gaze cannot be ignored (but neither can arrows)

Recent studies have shown that switch costs (i.e., slower responding on task-alternation trials than on task-repetition trials) are not observed when on the preceding trial a no-go signal instructed the participant to withhold the response to the target stimulus. This finding suggests that neither task set is inhibited on no-go trials, and that the origin of switch costs is located in the application of the task set to the target stimulus. However, these studies also showed that responding after a no-go trial is substantially slower than after a go trial. This suggests that both task sets are inhibited on no-go trials and that switch costs originate from the preparation of a task set. In two experiments we created conditions that revealed an absence of switch costs in conjunction with relatively fast responding after no-go trials. Together these findings confirm that switch costs originate from the application of the task set.     

More conservative go/no-go response criterion under high working memory load

Previous work has shown that the efficiency of selective attention depends on the availability of cognitive control functions, including working memory. Here we examined the role of working memory in another task involving executive control, namely, a go/no-go task. Participants performed the Sustained Attention to Response Task, which requires withholding a prepotent response to an infrequent target, when at the same time placing a low or high load on an unrelated working memory task. Working memory load had the effect of reducing accuracy on the go trials, when at the same time increasing accuracy on the no-go trials. We interpret these findings to suggest that high working memory load led to a shift to a more conservative response criterion.     

The role of response inhibition in temporal preparation: Evidence from a go/no-go task

During the foreperiod (FP) of a warned reaction task, participants engage in a process of temporal preparation to speed response to the impending target stimulus. Previous neurophysiological studies have shown that inhibition is applied during FP to prevent premature response. Previous behavioral studies have shown that the duration of FP on both the current and the preceding trial codetermine response time to the target. Integrating these findings, the present study tested the hypothesis that the behavioral effects find their origin in response inhibition on the preceding trial. In two experiments the variable-FP paradigm was combined with a go/no-go task, in which no-go stimuli required explicit response inhibition. The resulting data pattern revealed sequential effects of both FP (long or short) and response requirement (go or no-go), which could be jointly understood as expressions of response inhibition, consistent with the hypothesis.     

A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect

Simon effects might partly reflect stimulus-triggered response activation. According to the response-discrimination hypothesis, however, stimulus-triggered response activation shows up in Simon effects only when stimulus locations match the top-down selected spatial codes used to discriminate between alternative responses. Five experiments support this hypothesis. In Experiment 1, spatial codes of each response differed by horizontal and vertical axis position, yet one axis discriminated between alternative responses, whereas the other did not. Simon effects resulted for targets on discriminating axes only. In Experiment 2, both spatial axes discriminated between responses, and targets on both axes produced Simon effects. In Experiment 3, Simon effects resulted for a spatial choice-reaction task but not for a go/no-go task. Even in the go/no-go task, a Simon effect was restored when a two-choice reaction task preceded the go/no-go task (Experiment 4) or when participants initiated trials with responses spatially discriminated from the go response (Experiment 5).     

The role of the prefrontal cortex in the go/no-go task in humans: a positron emission tomography study

To study the localization of response inhibition in the human brain, especially the role of the prefrontal cortex and laterality of its activation, we used positron emission tomography (PET) to measure regional cerebral blood flow in 11 right-handed participants while they performed a go/no-go and a simple control reaction-time task. In the control task, the participants responded to a target stimulus following a cue stimulus. In the go/no-go task they were instructed to inhibit the required response if the target stimulus did not appear. These tasks were performed using each hand. The right prefrontal cortex was found to be significantly activated when the go/no-go task was compared with the control task, regardless of the responding hand. The results indicated that response inhibition per se may be controlled by the right prefrontal cortex regardless of response hand for right-handed participants.     

Emotions in cognitive conflicts are not aversive but are task specific

It has been suggested that cognitive conflicts require effortful processing and, therefore, are aversive (Botvinick, 2007). In the present study, we compared conflicts emerging from the inhibition of a predominant response tendency in a go/no-go task with those between incompatible response activations in a Simon task in a within-subjects design, using the same type of stimuli. Whereas no-go trials elicited reduced skin conductance and pupillometric responses, but prolonged corrugator muscle activity, as compared with go trials, incompatible and compatible Simon trials were indistinguishable with respect to these parameters. Furthermore, the conflictsensitive N2 components of the event-related brain potential were similar in amplitude, but showed significantly different scalp distributions, indicating dissociable neural generator systems. The present findings suggest the involvement of different emotional and cognitive processes in both types of cognitive conflicts—none being aversive, however. In addition, the N2 findings call into question claims of common monitoring systems for all kinds of cognitive conflicts.     

Is the go/no-go lexical decision task an alternative to the yes/no lexical decision task?

In the go/no-go lexical decision task (LDT), participants are instructed to respond as quickly as they can when a word is presented and not to respond if a nonword is presented. By minimizing part of the response selection process in the experimental task, the impact of response decision time on the obtained lexical decision time is probably reduced relative to the standard yes/no LDT (Gordon, 1983). Experiments 1 and 2 show that the go/no-go LDT is sensitive to the effects of word frequency and associative priming--the magnitude of these effects is similar with the two tasks. More important, the go/no-go LDT has a number of advantages with respect to the "standard" yes/no LDT: It offers faster response times, more accurate responding, and fewer processing demands than does the yes/no task. Accordingly, the go/no-go task appears to be an excellent alternative to the standard yes/no task.     

A model of the go/no-go task

In this article, the first explicit, theory-based comparison of 2-choice and go/no-go variants of 3 experimental tasks is presented. Prior research has questioned whether the underlying core-information processing is different for the 2 variants of a task or whether they differ mostly in response demands. The authors examined 4 different diffusion models for the go/no-go variant of each task along with a standard diffusion model for the 2-choice variant (R. Ratcliff, 1978). The 2-choice and the go/no-go models were fit to data from 4 lexical decision experiments, 1 numerosity discrimination experiment, and 1 recognition memory experiment, each with 2-choice and go/no-go variants. The models that assumed an implicit decision criterion for no-go responses produced better fits than models that did not. The best model was one in which only response criteria and the nondecisional components of processing changed between the 2 variants, supporting the view that the core information on which decisions are based is not different between them.