this article are also gratefully acknowledged

When subjects switch between a pair of stimulus–response tasks, reaction time is slower on trial N if a different task was performed on trial N � 1. We present a parallel distributed processing (PDP) model that simulates this effect when subjects switch between word reading and color naming in response to Stroop stimuli. Reaction time on ‘‘switch trials’ ’ can be slowed by an extended response selection process which results from (a) persisting, inappropriate states of activation and inhibition of task-controlling representations; and (b) associative learning, which allows stimuli to evoke tasks sets with which they have recently been associated (as proposed by Allport & Wylie, 2000). The model provides a good fit to a large body of empirical data, including findings which have been seen as problematic for this explanation of switch costs, and shows similar behavior when the parameters are set to random values, supporting Allport and Wylie’s proposal. © 2001 Elsevier Science Key Words: task switching; task set; Stroop effect; parallel distributed processing; executive functions. Atkinson and Shiffrin (1968) proposed a distinction between relatively permanent cognitive structures, such as short- and long-term memory, and control processes which harness those fixed structures in order to attain specific goals. This distinction was elaborated in the following years (e.g.,

WhH subjectsswitch between two tasks, performance is slower after a taskswitch tht after a task repetition. We report five experimentsshperi thp a large part ofth)I "task-sh5S) costs" cannot be attributed to a control operation, needed to configureth cognitive system for th upcoming task (e.g., Rogers & Monsell, 1995). In all experiments subjects switchs between picture-naming and word-reading. We presented di#erent stimulieithl in just one of th two tasks, or inboth ofth9S ShSI#qH(93 were larger for stimuli presented inboth tasks ths forthH3 presented in only one task, even after more the 100 intervening trials between prime and probe events. We suggest (as proposed by Allport & Wylie, 2000)th0 stimuli acquire associationswith th tasks inwh9E th9 occur.Whu th current task activation is weak, as on aswitch of tasks, stimuli can trigger retrieval of th associated, competing task, provoking larger time costs.

Correct performance often depends on remembering the task one has been instructed to do. When the task periodically changes, memory for the current task must decay (lose activation) to prevent it from interfering with memory for the next task when that is encoded. Three task-switching experiments examine this decay process. Each shows within-run slowing, a performance decline occurring as memory for the current task decays. In experiment 1, slowing is attenuated when memory for the task is optional, suggesting that memory is indeed causal. Experiment 2 finds slowing despite a flat hazard rate for task instructions, suggesting that slowing is not an artifact of instruction anticipation. Experiment 3 finds slowing in the familiar alternatingruns paradigm (Rogers & Monsell, 1995), suggesting that it may lurk elsewhere. A process model of activation explains within-run slowing and relates it to switch cost and "restart cost" (Allport & Wylie, 2000) in functional terms.

Unexpected interruptions introduced during the execution phase of simple Tower of London problems incurred a time cost when the interrupted goal was retrieved, and this cost was exacerbated the longer the goal was suspended. Furthermore, time taken to retrieve goals was greater following a more complex interruption, indicating that processing limitations may be as important as time-based limitations in determining the ease of goal retrieval. Such findings cannot simply be attributed to task-switching costs and are evaluated in relation to current models of goal memory (E. M. Altmann & G. J. Trafton, 2002; J. R. Anderson & S. Douglass, 2001), which provide a useful basis for the investigation and interpretation of interruption effects.

A series of experiments introduced interruptions to the execution phase of simple Tower of London problems and found that the opportunity for preparation before the break in task reduced the time cost at resumption. Retrieval of the suspended goal was facilitated when participants were given the opportunity to encode retrieval cues during an “interruption lag ” (the brief time before engaging in the interrupting task) but was impeded when these visual cues were subsequently altered following interruption. The results provide useful support for the goal-activation model (E. M. Altmann & G. J. Trafton, 2002), which assumes that context—at the points of both goal suspension and goal retrieval—is critical to efficient interruption recovery.

A model of cognitive control in task switching is developed in which controlled performance depends on the system maintaining access to a code in episodic memory representing the most recently cued task. The main constraint on access to the current task code is proactive interference from old task codes. This interference and the mechanisms that contend with it reproduce a wide range of behavioral phenomena when simulated, including well-known task-switching effects, such as latency and error switch costs, and effects on which other theories are silent, such as with-run slowing and within-run error increase. The model generalizes across multiple task-switching procedures, suggesting that episodic task codes play an important role in keeping the cognitive system focused under a variety of performance constraints.

This paper reviews recent approaches to human action planning and the cognitive representation of intentional actions. Evidence suggests that action planning takes place in terms of anticipated features of the intended goal, that is, in terms of action effects. These effects are acquired from early infancy on by registering contingencies between movements and perceptual movement outcomes. Co-occurrence of movements and effects leads to the creation of bidirectional associations between the underlying internal codes, thus establishing distributed perception-action networks subserving both perceiving external events and intentionally producing them. Action plans determine only the general, goal-relevant features of intended actions, while the fine-tuning is left to on-line sensory-motor processing. Action plans emerge from competition for action control between several factors: overlearned habits, perceptual events, and emotional influences, among others. Accordingly, action control represents a balance between personal intentions and wishes on the one hand and environmental affordances and demands on the other. KEYWORDS: action planning, intentional action, goal, perception and action, feedback, action effects, action control, will, priming, imitation, mirror neurons, emotion and action DOMAINS: behavioral psychology, cognition, development, learning and memory, motor processes, sensation and perception, neuroscience, behavior PLANNING AN ACTION Humans perform actions to reach goals, that is, to create or modify some event or state of affairs according to their intentions --- otherwise we would talk of movement but not action. Logically, then, intentional, goal-directed action presupposes some sort of (conscious or unconscious) anticipation of the intended goal event,...

this article. We also thank Phil Allen, Jim Johnston, Joel Lachter, and Roger Remington for their insight and valuable discussions

this article without authors' permission) The Absence of A Switch Cost When Preparing for Multiple Tasks: Interactions Between Element- and Ensemble-Level Effects Mei-Ching Lien & Eric Ruthruff NASA Ames Research Center Six experiments examined an intriguing result from a dual-task study by De Jong (1995) where no task-switch cost was found. We investigated whether this phenomenon is due to the formation of task ensembles - a control structure covering more than one task element (e.g., prepare Task 1 and the switch to Task 2). Experiment 1, where tasks were performed individually, showed the usual large switch cost (182 ms). This cost disappeared and even reversed in Experiments 2-5, where the temporal and/or spatial contiguity between adjacent task elements was increased to encourage ensemble formation. In Experiment 6, the switch cost between elements was large within an ensemble, but small or nonexistent between ensembles. These data suggest that the element-level effect is fragile and can be reduced or eliminated when a higher-level control structure is formed. A dual-route model of task switching is proposed