Voluntary Task Switching: Chasing the Elusive Homunculus.

Arrington, Catherine M.; Logan, Gordon D. · 2005 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.31.4.683

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This paper investigates the theoretical controversy surrounding the origins of switch costs in task-switching paradigms, specifically debating whether these costs arise from top-down executive control or bottom-up passive interactions. The authors introduce a "voluntary task switching" procedure where participants choose which task to perform on each trial, ensuring that top-down control is necessary. The study aims to determine if this voluntary, top-down act of control produces switch costs and how these costs compare to those in explicit task-cuing procedures, where tasks are dictated by external cues. The research comprises six experiments, with Experiments 1–3 directly contrasting voluntary task switching against explicit task cuing. Participants performed magnitude and parity judgments on single digits. In voluntary conditions, subjects chose tasks randomly, while in cued conditions, warning box colors indicated the required task. The experiments manipulated the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the warning signal and the target stimulus (0, 300, 600, and 900 ms) to assess preparation time. Experiments 4–6 further separated choice costs from switch costs to isolate the mechanisms involved. Data analysis focused on reaction times, accuracy, and choice probabilities, including the proportion of task repetitions versus switches. The results demonstrated robust switch costs in voluntary task switching, confirming that top-down processes can indeed generate these costs. Crucially, switch costs were significantly smaller when subjects voluntarily chose to switch tasks compared to when they were instructed to switch by an external cue. Analysis of choice behavior revealed that subjects exhibited a repetition bias, choosing to repeat tasks more often than chance, but this choice was largely independent of external stimulus characteristics. For instance, the color of the warning box in voluntary conditions had negligible influence on task selection, supporting the conclusion that choices were emitted via top-down control rather than elicited by bottom-up stimulus features. The magnitude of switch costs decreased as the interval between trials increased, consistent with preparation effects. These findings shift the balance of evidence toward models of task switching that incorporate top-down mechanisms. The study concludes that the degree to which task-switching procedures capture top-down versus bottom-up processes depends on the environmental support provided. By forcing subjects to voluntarily select tasks, the procedure isolates the endogenous act of control, demonstrating that the cognitive reconfiguration required for voluntary switching incurs a measurable cost, albeit smaller than that incurred in externally cued switching. This suggests that previous observations of switch costs may have conflated different underlying mechanisms, and that voluntary switching offers a distinct window into executive control processes.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• task switching
• executive function