Abstract
The present study investigated whether the advanced reconfiguration processes of the voluntary switching (VTS) paradigm were different from those of the instructed task switching (ITS) paradigm by examining event-related potentials (ERPs) in a within-subjects design. Of importance, given that effector-to-task mapping might lead to differential preparatory strategies, two effector-to-task mapping groups were studied: the hand-to-task (HAND) and finger-to-task (FINGER) groups. Intriguingly, we found the increased posterior negativity for voluntary switch (and/or increased posterior positivity for voluntary repeat) was exclusive to the HAND group, whereas the increased switch-related late posterior positivity in the ITS paradigm was independent of the effector manipulation. Moreover, the lateralized readiness potentials (LRP) and the mu and beta motor-related amplitude asymmetries indicated that the differential switch-related modulations were not the byproduct of hand-specific preparation. The advanced preparatory strategies in the VTS and ITS paradigms are discussed.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1389-1402 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Psychonomic Bulletin and Review |
Volume | 22 |
Issue number | 5 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 26 10 2015 |
Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2014, Psychonomic Society, Inc.
Keywords
- Cognitive control
- ERP
- LRP
- Strategy
- Voluntary task switching