September 2019
Volume 19, Issue 10
Open Access
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2019
The Influence of Context Representations on Cognitive Control States
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Reem Alzahabi
    The Center for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University
  • Erika Hussey
    The Center for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University
    U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center
  • Matthew S Cain
    The Center for Applied Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Tufts University
    U.S. Army Natick Soldier Research, Development, and Engineering Center
  • Nathan Ward
    Department of Psychology, Tufts University
Journal of Vision September 2019, Vol.19, 281c. doi:https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.281c
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Reem Alzahabi, Erika Hussey, Matthew S Cain, Nathan Ward; The Influence of Context Representations on Cognitive Control States. Journal of Vision 2019;19(10):281c. https://doi.org/10.1167/19.10.281c.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Cognitive control operates via two distinct mechanisms, proactive and reactive control. These control states are engaged differentially, depending on a number of within-subject factors, but also between-group variables. While research has begun to explore if shifts in control can be experimentally modulated, little is known about whether context impacts which control state is utilized. Thus, we explored if contextual factors temporarily bias the deployment of a particular control state. Participants were exposed to a context manipulation designed to promote proactive or reactive processing, followed by an AX-CPT task, where we assessed immediate transfer on preferential adoption of one control mode over another. The context manipulation involved a task-switching paradigm, where a randomly selected cue on each trial indicated to participants to either classify a number as odd/even or a letter as consonant/vowel. The context varied such that the preparation time for task-switching was either short or long to prompt reactive and proactive states, respectively. In the AX-CPT task, participants were asked to make a target response when they detected an “AX” sequence in a continuous stream of letters. In combination with performance on AX trials, non-AX pairs, (AY, BX, and BY), were used as measures to delineate the strategic effects of proactive and reactive control. Results revealed that following both short and long preparation contexts, participants equally engaged proactive and reactive control. Average error rates, F(1, 43) = 0.30, p = 0.59, and response times, F(1,42) = 0.03, p = 0.87, in the AX-CPT were no different as a function of context. Three other indices reflecting the use of proactive control (d’-context, A-cue bias, and the Proactive Behavioral Index) were also computed, and revealed no significant differences as a function of context. Together, these data suggest that contextual representations may not always impact which cognitive control state is utilized.

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×