Failure-to-Engage (FTE, De Jong, 2000) theory explains slowed response time after switching tasks as in part due to participants sometimes failing to prepare. Brown et al. (2006) rejected FTE because, in an alternating-runs paradigm, they did not observe fixed crossing point between response-time distributions that it predicts. We replicated these findings in a cued-task paradigm that allowed us to separately examine the effects of response-to-target interval and cue-to-target interval. These results guided an extension of FTE that was tested in a further experiment and shown to be able to accommodate the effects of the interval manipulations as well as both task and cue switching. We then apply a new modeling approach to obtain direct estimates of the probability of preparation and conclude that De Jong's insights about preparation failure provide a tractable framework that can explain aspects of all of the four major task-switching phenomena identified by Monsell (2003).

Item Type:	Refereed Article
Keywords:	Cognitive control; Mathematical modeling; Response time distribution; Task switching
Research Division:	Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
Research Group:	Cognitive Sciences
Research Field:	Decision Making
Objective Division:	Expanding Knowledge
Objective Group:	Expanding Knowledge
Objective Field:	Expanding Knowledge in Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
UTAS Author:	Heathcote, A (Professor Andrew Heathcote)
ID Code:	98936
Year Published:	2014
Web of Science® Times Cited:	6
Deposited By:	Medicine
Deposited On:	2015-03-10
Last Modified:	2017-10-31
Downloads:	0