Downloads: 55

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
s13423-016-1052-3.pdf347.38 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Same task rules, different responses: Goal neglect, stimulus–response mappings and response modalities
Authors: Iveson, Matthew H.
Tanida, Yuki
Saito, Satoru  kyouindb  KAKEN_id  orcid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0403-3606 (unconfirmed)
Author's alias: 齊藤, 智
Keywords: Goal maintenance
Working memory
Issue Date: Dec-2016
Publisher: Springer Nature
Journal title: Psychonomic Bulletin and Review
Volume: 23
Issue: 6
Start page: 1968
End page: 1973
Abstract: To complete complex tasks, individuals must actively maintain task rules to direct behavior correctly. Failure to use task rules appropriately, termed goal neglect, has been shown across both vocal and manual response modalities. However, previous goal maintenance studies have differed not only in the response modality that they require, but also in the complexity of the stimulus–response mappings that participants must use during the task. The present study examines the effects of both response modality and stimulus–response mapping complexity, separately, on the rate of goal neglect in a modification of a classic goal maintenance task. Seventy-two younger adults were administered a shape-monitoring task, with three between-subjects response conditions: a vocal response with a simple stimulus–response mapping, a vocal response with a complex stimulus–response mapping, and a manual response with a complex stimulus–response mapping. Contrasting the rate at which task rules were neglected between response conditions showed that participants using complex stimulus–response mappings committed more frequent goal neglect than those using simple mappings, but that participants using vocal or manual responses did not differ in their rate of goal neglect once both responses required complex mappings. This suggests that the need to represent novel and complex stimulus–response mappings, of any modality, at the same time as novel task rules within working memory leads to some task rules being insufficiently maintained.
Rights: This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in 'Psychonomic Bulletin and Review'. The final authenticated version is available online at: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1052-3
The full-text file will be made open to the public on 06 May 2017 in accordance with publisher's 'Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving'.
この論文は出版社版でありません。引用の際には出版社版をご確認ご利用ください。
This is not the published version. Please cite only the published version.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2433/251412
DOI(Published Version): 10.3758/s13423-016-1052-3
PubMed ID: 27154228
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Show full item record

Export to RefWorks


Export Format: 


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.