Over the past decade, many cognitive control researchers have studied to what extent adaptations to conflict are domain-general or rather specific, mostly by testing whether or not the congruency sequence effect (CSE) transfers across different conditions (e.g., conflict type, task sets, contexts, et cetera). The CSE refers to the observation that congruency effects in conflict tasks tend to be reduced following incongruent relative to following congruent trials, and is considered a prime measure of cognitive control. By investigating the transfer of this CSE across different conflict types, tasks, or contexts, researchers made several inferences about the scope of cognitive control. This method gained popularity during the last few years, spawning an interesting, yet seemingly inconsistent set of results. Consequently, these observations gave rise to a number of equally divergent theories about the determinants and scope of conflict adaptation. In this review, we offer a systematic overview of these past studies, as well as an evaluation of the theories that have been put forward to account for the results. Finally, we propose an integration of these various theoretical views in a unifying framework that centers on the role of context (dis)similarity. This framework allows us to generate new predictions about the relation between task or context similarity and the scope of cognitive control. Specifically, while most theories imply that increasing contextual differences will result in reduced transfer of the CSE, we propose that context similarity and across-context control follow a U-shaped function instead.

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/5731202/file/5731203.pdf

What determines the specificity of conflict adaptation? A review, critical analysis, and proposed synthesis

Following new task instructions: Evidence for a dissociation between knowing and doing

The task novelty paradox: Flexible control of inflexible neural pathways during rapid instructed task learning

Background: After stroke, the learned non-use of a paretic arm is a major obstacle to the improvement of hand function. / Objective: We examined whether patients with a central paresis could profit from applying the self-regulation strategy of making if-then plans that specify situational triggers to using the paretic arm. / Method: Seventeen stroke patients with a mild to moderate hand paresis were asked to perform a Simon task which is commonly used to study the enhanced executive control needed when there is a mismatch between stimulus (e.g., color) and response (e.g., location) features. We examined whether patients with hemiparesis would be able to reduce the Simon effect (i.e., responding slower to mismatched as compared to matched stimulus and response features) by creating new stimulus-response associations via if-then plans. / Results: A significant Simon effect was observed in both the affected and the non-affected arm for control trials. However, there was no longer a significant Simon effect for the critical trials prepared by forming if-then plans. This led to a significant stimulus×compatibility interaction effect for the affected arm and a marginally significant interaction effect for the nonaffected arm. Making if-then plans was effective for eliminating or at least reducing the Simon effect for the affected and the non-affected arm, respectively. / Conclusion: This observation opens a potential new route to improving stroke rehabilitation. If-then plans may qualify as a viable strategy to overcome the learned non-use of the affected arm. Further research is now required to develop and test therapeutic measures based on this proof-of-principle.

Making if-then plans counteracts learned non-use in stroke patients: A proof-of-principle study.

Testing interactive effects of automatic and conflict control processes during response inhibition - A system neurophysiological study.

Previous behavioral studies have shown that instructions about stimulus–response (S-R) mappings can influence task performance even when these instructions are irrelevant for the current task. In the present study, we tested whether automatic effects of S–R instructions occur because the instructed stimuli automatically activate their corresponding responses. We registered the lateralized readiness potentials (LRPs) that were evoked by the instructed stimuli while participants were performing a task for which those mappings were irrelevant. Instructed S–R mappings clearly affected task performance in electrophysiological and behavioral measures. The LRP was found to deflect in the direction of the response tendency that corresponded with the instructed S–R mapping. Early activation of the instructed response was observed but occurred predominantly on slow trials. In contrast, response conflict evoked by instructed S–R mappings did not modulate the N2 amplitude. The results strongly suggest that, like experienced S–R mappings, instructed S–R mappings can lead to automatic response activation, but possibly via a different route.

/pdf/automatic-motor-activation-by-mere-instruction-1wiovn7hnu.pdf

Automatic motor activation by mere instruction

A growing body of research demonstrates that instructions can elicit automatic response activations. The results of the present study indicate that instruction-based response activations can also counteract automatic response activations based on long-term associations. To this end, we focused on the Simon effect, which is the observation that responding to a nonspatial feature of a stimulus (e. g., color) is faster and more accurate when the task-irrelevant stimulus position matches the spatial position of the correct response. The Simon effect can be eliminated or even reversed when combining a Simon task with an incompatible position task (e. g., press right for left stimuli; press left for right stimuli). The present study demonstrates that the Simon effect is eliminated even after presenting only the instructions of an incompatible position task, without participants having the opportunity to practice that task. Moderate practice of the incompatible task did not add anything to the effect of the instructions. Finally, the instructions of a compatible spatial stimulus-response task did not affect the Simon effect. The present results converge with previous findings indicating that the Simon effect is highly malleable and suggest that stimulus-response associations formed on the basis of instructions can counteract effects of long-term stimulus-response associations.

Eliminating the Simon effect by instruction

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/8522024/file/8522025.pdf

The role of motor imagery in learning via instructions

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/5951435/file/5951443.pdf

Congruency effects on the basis of instructed response-effect contingencies

Instructions play an important role in daily life. Instructions specify response rules and the conditions in which these apply. In recent years, research has emphasized the importance of instructions, and an increasing number of studies have demonstrated that the power of instructions is far stronger than previously thought. Research has indicated that instructions can induce (e.g., Liefooghe, Wenke, & De Houwer, 2012; Meiran, Pereg, Kessler, Cole, & Braver, 2015a), modulate (e.g., Cohen, Bayer, Jaudas, & Gollwitzer, 2008), and even eliminate (e.g., Bardi, Bundt, Notebaert, & Brass, 2015; Theeuwes, Liefooghe, & De Houwer, 2014) automatic effects on behavior. At the present time, research has primarily focused on instructions specifying that a particular response has to be made or a response strategy has to be adopted (e.g., press fast) when a particular condition is met (e.g., the presentation of a stimulus). Nevertheless, a substantial amount of instructions in daily life do not include the requirement to respond but the requirement not to respond. To our knowledge the impact of these instructions has not been investigated so far. Accordingly, the present study investigated whether no-go instructions that have not been applied overtly before can also bias behavior automatically.No-go instructions are typically used in the go/no-go task (Donders, 1868/1969). In this task, instructions relate one stimulus to a go response and another stimulus to a no-go response. The proportion of false hits on no-go trials is considered an index of the ability to inhibit the tendency to respond. Recent studies have suggested that no-go responses are completed through automatized control processes (e.g., Verbruggen & Logan, 2008). Verbruggen and Logan (2008) used a go/no-go task in which participants executed a go or a no-go response to either a living or a nonliving object. After a practice phase, the go/no-go requirements switched. For instance, if living objects required no-go responses in the practice phase, living objects required go responses in the test phase. The test phase also included new stimuli that were not presented in the practice phase. Verbruggen and Logan observed that go responses to stimuli, which required a no-go response in the practice phase, were slower compared to go responses to new stimuli. In a follow-up experiment, such slowing was observed when the go and no-go responses in the test phase and the practice phase had to be applied to different stimulus features, for instance, size (e.g., small i go; large i no-go) in the practice phase and livingness (e.g., living i go; nonliving i no-go) in the test phase. On the basis of these findings, Verbruggen and Logan suggested that associations between a stimulus and a no-go response are established on the basis of practice and that such associations can be retrieved automatically later on.The present study investigated whether effects similar to the those reported by Verbruggen and Logan (2008) could be obtained for no-go instructions that were never practiced overtly before. To this end, we used a procedure introduced by Liefooghe et al. (2012; see also Liefooghe, De Houwer, & Wenke, 2013). In the original procedure of Liefooghe and colleagues, participants were presented with different runs of trials on which two tasks could be performed: the inducer task and the diagnostic task. In each run, both tasks shared the same stimuli and responses. Furthermore, each run used a different pair of stimuli, and stimuli were never reused across different runs. At the beginning of each run, participants received two novel arbitrary stimulus-response (S-R) mappings of the inducer task. Each S-R mapping assigned the identity of a stimulus to a left or a right response (e.g., If "X," press left; if "Y," press right). Before executing the inducer task, several trials of the diagnostic task had to be performed. In the diagnostic task, participants decided whether a stimulus was presented in italic or upright, again by pressing a left or a right response key (e. …

/pdf/automatic-effects-of-no-go-instructions-z3bpf5xrun.pdf

Marijke Theeuwes

Papers

Automatic motor activation by mere instruction

Eliminating the Simon effect by instruction

The role of motor imagery in learning via instructions

Congruency effects on the basis of instructed response-effect contingencies

Automatic effects of no-go instructions.