Evidence of task-triggered retrieval of the previous response: a binding perspective on response-repetition benefits in task switching

Benini, Elena; Möller, Malte; Koch, Iring; Philipp, Andrea M.; Qiu, Ruyi; Mayr, Susanne · 2023 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.3758/s13423-023-02409-9

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

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

Summary

This study investigates the mechanisms underlying response-repetition (RR) benefits in task-switching paradigms, specifically testing predictions derived from binding and retrieval accounts. In task switching, participants typically perform better when repeating a response if the task also repeats, but this benefit vanishes or reverses when the task switches. While various theories explain this interaction—including response inhibition, reconfiguration, and associative learning—the authors focused on episodic-retrieval accounts. These accounts propose that task-response bindings formed in a previous trial are retrieved when the task repeats, thereby activating the previous response. The study aimed to provide evidence for this retrieval mechanism by examining error patterns in conditions where competing theories predict no retrieval or priming of the previous response. The researchers conducted two experiments using a task-switching paradigm with three response options, allowing them to distinguish between correct responses, response-repetition errors (incorrectly repeating the previous response), and residual errors. In Experiment 1 (N=46), participants categorized digits by value or font size. The critical analysis focused on response-switch trials where the target category switched, a condition where inhibition, reconfiguration, and associative-learning accounts do not predict the reactivation of the previous response. The dependent variable was the probability of committing a response-repetition error given that an error occurred. Experiment 2 (N=110) replicated this design while adding an orthogonal context manipulation (cue color) to test if context repetition modulated the retrieval effect. The results supported the binding and retrieval hypothesis. In Experiment 1, response-repetition errors were significantly more likely in task repetitions (56.8% of errors) than in task switches (41.9%). This indicates that repeating the task retrieved the previous response, leading to perseveration errors even when that response was incorrect for the current trial. Standard task-switching effects were also observed, with faster reaction times and lower error rates in task repetitions. Experiment 2 replicated the main finding: response-repetition errors were more frequent in task repetitions (54.9%) than switches (41.2%). However, the orthogonal context manipulation did not significantly modulate this effect, suggesting that the task-response binding was robust regardless of context repetition. These findings provide specific evidence for task-triggered retrieval of the previous response as a mechanism underlying RR benefits. Because the increased probability of response-repetition errors occurred in conditions where the target category switched, the results cannot be easily explained by accounts relying on target-category priming or inhibition alone. Instead, they align with binding and retrieval frameworks, which posit that the task cue serves as a retrieval cue for the entire episode, including the response. This study highlights task-response binding as a fundamental process in action control, demonstrating that retrieval mechanisms operate even when the retrieved response is inappropriate for the current trial.

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