Action-effect sharing induces task-set sharing in joint task switching

descriptionPublicationkeyboard_double_arrow_right Article , Preprint 01 Aug 2017 United Kingdom, Netherlands English Publisher:Elsevier BVJournal:Cognition, volume 165, pages 113-120 (issn: 0010-0277,

Copyright policy )

Authors: Hommel, Bernhard; Wall, Helen; Yamaguchi , Motonori; Wall, Helen;

doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.05.022 , 10.31234/osf.io/xkyhc , 10.17605/osf.io/xkyhc

pmid: 28535468

handle: 1887/74593

Action-effect sharing induces task-set sharing in joint task switching

- Summary
- Subjects
- Related research
  (56)
- Metrics

Abstract

A central issue in the study of joint task performance has been one of whether co-acting individuals perform their partner’s part of the task as if it were their own. The present study addressed this issue by using joint task switching. A pair of actors shared two tasks that were presented in a random order, whereby the relevant task and actor were cued on each trial. Responses produced action effects that were either shared or separate between co-actors. When co-actors produced separate action effects, switch costs were obtained within the same actor (i.e., when the same actor performed consecutive trials) but not between co-actors (when different actors performed consecutive trials), implying that actors did not perform their co-actor’s part. When the same action effects were shared between co-actors, however, switch costs were also obtained between co-actors, implying that actors did perform their co-actor’s part. The results indicated that shared action effects induce task-set sharing between co-acting individuals.

Countries

United Kingdom, Netherlands

Related Organizations

Edge Hill University
United Kingdom
Leiden University
Netherlands
University of Essex
United Kingdom

Keywords

56 Research products, page 1 of 6

A data-driven study of Chinese participants’ social judgments of Chinese faces
2018IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
A machine learning approach for probing the unconscious: evidence for unconscious lie detection being more accurate
2018IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
Large inversion effects are not specific to faces and do not vary with object expertise
2016IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
What deep learning can tell us about higher cognitive functions like mindreading?
2018IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
The Effects of Blur and Inversion on the Recognition of Ambient Face Images
2018IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
The flash-lag, Fröhlich and related motion illusions are artifacts of discrete sampling in the visual system
2017IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
Rapid and Coarse Face Detection in Cortex
2017IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
The role of similarity in inattentional blindness: Selective enhancement, selective suppression, or both?
2017IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
Evolution of word meanings through metaphorical mapping: Systematicity over the past millennium
2017IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments
Word Senses
2018IsAmongTopNSimilarDocuments

chevron_left
1
2
3
4
5
chevron_right

Impact byBIP!

	selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).	15
	popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.	Top 10%
	influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).	Average
	impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.	Top 10%