Abstract
We investigated the simultaneous influence of expectation and experience on metacontrol, which we define as the instantiation of context-specific control states. These states could entail heightened control states in preparation for frequent task switching or lowered control states for task repetition. Specifically, we examined whether “expectations” regarding future control demands prompt proactive metacontrol, while “experiences” with items associated with specific control demands facilitate reactive metacontrol. In Experiment 1, we utilized EEG with a high temporal resolution to differentiate between brain activities associated with proactive and reactive metacontrol. We successfully observed cue-locked and image-locked ERP patterns associated with proactive and reactive metacontrol, respectively, supporting concurrent instantiation of two metacontrol modes. In Experiment 2, we focused on individual differences to investigate the modulatory role of working memory capacity (WMC) in the concurrent instantiation of two metacontrol modes. Our findings revealed that individuals with higher WMC exhibited enhanced proactive metacontrol, indicated by smaller response time variability (RTV). Additionally, individuals with higher WMC showed a lower tendency to rely on reactive metacontrol, indicated by a smaller item-specific switch probability (ISSP) effect. In conclusion, our results suggest that proactive and reactive metacontrol can coexist, but their interplay is influenced by individuals’ WMC. Higher WMC promotes the use of proactive metacontrol while attenuating reliance on reactive metacontrol. This study provides insights into the interplay between proactive and reactive metacontrol and highlights the impact of WMC on their concurrent instantiation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
The datasets are shared on Open Science Framework https://osf.io/q3ayh/?view_only=a26d8bb0b80c42ec8686e4e2687e7c0e.
Notes
The criteria for excluding participants matched those of Experiment 2 but deviated from our preregistration protocol.
We applied a less strict high-pass filter than what was preregistered (0.1 Hz instead of 0.5 Hz) after learning that high-pass filters can cause significant amplitude reduction in slow components when the cutoff exceeds approximately 0.1 Hz (Kappenman & Luck 2010).
While we preregistered to investigate ERP differences between item types for assessing reactive metacontrol, we subsequently recognized that a more appropriate approach would be to analyze and report the cost of switching between item types (similar to what has been done for RT/accuracy).
We adopted more flexible exclusion criteria relying on the mean and standard deviation of the current datasets, rather than using absolute cutoff criteria as stated in the preregistration. Additionally, two experiments were preregistered, but Experiment 2 described in the preregistration was not conducted.
This deviated from the preregistration protocol, which originally intended to incorporate WMC as a categorical variable.
The use of RTV was not preregistered.
We furthermore reported the correlation between individuals' RTV and their mean RT as well as cost of switching. RTV showed a moderate correlation with cost of switching (Pearson’s r = .15, t(181) = 2.10, p = 0.037, after excluding 4 outliers) but not with mean RT (Pearson’s r = −.06, t(171) = −0.74, p = .461), after excluding 14 outliers.
References
Aben, B., Calderon, C. B., Van der Cruyssen, L., Picksak, D., Van den Bussche, E., & Verguts, T. (2019). Context-dependent modulation of cognitive control involves different temporal profiles of fronto-parietal activity. NeuroImage, 189(February), 755–762. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.02.004
Astle, D. E., Jackson, G. M., & Swainson, R. (2006). Dissociating neural indices of dynamic cognitive control in advance task-set preparation: An ERP study of task switching. Brain Research, 1125(1), 94–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.09.092
Astle, D. E., Jackson, G. M., & Swainson, R. (2008). Fractionating the cognitive control required to bring about a change in the task: A dense-sensor event-related potential study. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 20(2), 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2008.20015
Barch, D. M., Braver, T. S., Nystrom, L. E., Forman, S. D., Noll, D. C., & Cohen, J. D. (1997). Dissociating working memory from task difficulty in human prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 35(10), 1373–1380. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0028-3932(97)00072-9
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Blais, C., Hubbard, E., & Mangun, G. R. (2016). ERP evidence for implicit priming of top–down control of attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 28(5), 763–772. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00925
Braver, T. S. (2012). The variable nature of cognitive control: A dual mechanisms framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2011.12.010
Braver, T. S., Gray, J. R., & Burgess, G. C. (2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In A. R. A. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake, & J. N. Towse (Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 76–106). Oxford University Press.
Braver, T. S., Paxton, J. L., Locke, H. S., & Barch, D. M. (2009). Flexible neural mechanisms of cognitive control within human prefrontal cortex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(18), 7351–7356. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0808187
Braver, T. S., Reynolds, J. R., & Donaldson, D. I. (2003). Neural mechanisms of transient and sustained cognitive control during task switching. Neuron, 39(4), 713–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(03)00466-5
Bugg, J. M., & Crump, M. J. (2012). In support of a distinction between voluntary and stimulus-driven control: A review of the literature on proportion congruent effects. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 367. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00367
Bugg, J. M., & Hutchison, K. A. (2013). Converging evidence for control of color–word Stroop interference at the item level. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(2), 433. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029145
Bugg, J. M., Diede, N. T., Cohen-Shikora, E. R., & Selmeczy, D. (2015). Expectations and experience: Dissociable bases for cognitive control? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(5), 1349. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000106
Chiew, K. S., & Braver, T. S. (2017). Context processing and cognitive control. In T. Egner (Ed.), The Wiley handbook of cognitive control (1st ed., pp. 143–166). John Wiley & Sons.
Chinn, L. K., Pauker, C. S., & Golob, E. J. (2018). Cognitive control and midline theta adjust across multiple timescales. Neuropsychologia, 111, 216–228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.01.031
Chiu, Y.-C., & Egner, T. (2017). Cueing cognitive flexibility: Item- specific learning of switch readiness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(12), 1950–1960. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000420
Chiu, Y. C., Jiang, J., & Egner, T. (2017). The caudate nucleus mediates learning of stimulus–control state associations. Journal of Neuroscience, 37(4), 1028–1038. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0778-16.2016
Cohen, J. D., Braver, T. S., Nystrom, L. E., Noll, D. C., Jonides, J., Smith, E. E., & Perlstein, W. M. (1997). Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task. Nature, 386, 604–608. https://doi.org/10.1038/386604a0
Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working memory capacity and its relation to general intelligence. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(12), 547–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.005
Cook, R. D. (1977). Detection of influential observation in linear regression. Technometrics, 15-18. https://doi.org/10.2307/1268249
Crump, M. J., Gong, Z., & Milliken, B. (2006). The context-specific proportion congruent Stroop effect: Location as a contextual cue. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(2), 316–321. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193850
de Pisapia, N., & Braver, T. S. (2006). A model of dual control mecha- nisms through anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortex interactions. Neurocomputing, 69(10/12), 1322–1326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2005.12.100
Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneumeth.2003.10.009
Dreisbach, G., & Haider, H. (2006). Preparatory adjustment of cognitive control in the task switching paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 334–338. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193853
Draheim, C., Harrison, T. L., Embretson, S. E., & Engle, R. W. (2018). What item response theory can tell us about the complex span tasks. Psychological Assessment, 30(1), 116–129. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000444
Engle, R. W. (2001). What is working memory capacity? In H. L. Roediger III., J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G Crowder (pp. 297–314). American Psychological Association.
Engle, R. W., & Kane, M. J. (2004). Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 44, 145–200.
Entel, O., & Tzelgov, J. (2020). When working memory meets control in the Stroop effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(7), 1387. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000790
Entel, O., Tzelgov, J., & Bereby-Meyer, Y. (2014). Proportion congruency effects: Instructions may be enough. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(SEP), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01108
Fassbender, C., Scangos, K., Lesh, T. A., & Carter, C. S. (2014). RT distributional analysis of cognitive-control-related brain activity in first-episode schizophrenia. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 14, 175–188. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-014-0252-4
Fales, C. L., Barch, D. M., Burgess, G. C., Schaefer, A., Mennin, D. S., Gray, J. R., & Braver, T. S. (2008). Anxiety and cognitive efficiency: differential modulation of transient and sustained neural activity during a working memory task. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(3), 239–253. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.8.3.239
Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2008). Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: A review. Psychophysiology, 45(1), 152–170. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00602.x
Fröber, K., & Dreisbach, G. (2021). How sequentially changing reward prospect modulates meta-control: Increasing reward prospect promotes cognitive flexibility. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 21, 534–548. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-020-00825-1
Goffaux, P., Phillips, N. A., Sinai, M., & Pushkar, D. (2006). Behavioural and electrophysiological measures of task switching during single and mixed-task conditions. Biological Psychology, 72(3), 278–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2005.11.009
Gonthier, C., Braver, T. S., & Bugg, J. M. (2016a). Dissociating proactive and reactive control in the Stroop task. Memory & Cognition, 44(5), 778–788. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-016-0591-1
Gonthier, C., Thomassin, N., & Roulin, J. L. (2016b). The composite complex span: French validation of a short working memory task. Behavior Research Methods, 48, 233–242. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0566-3
Goschke, T. (2003). Voluntary action and cognitive control from a cognitive neuroscience perspective. In S. Maasen, W. Prinz, & G. Roth (Eds.), Voluntary action: Brains, minds, and sociality (pp. 49–85). Oxford University Press.
Groppe, D. M., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2011). Mass univariate analysis of event-related brain potentials/fields I: A critical tutorial review. Psychophysiology, 48(12), 1711–1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2011.01273.x
Hoaglin, D. C., & Welsch, R. E. (1978). The hat matrix in regression and ANOVA. The American Statistician, 32(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1978.10479237
Hommel, B. (2015). Between persistence and flexibility: The yin and yang of action control. Advances in Motivation Science, 2, 33–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adms.2015.04.003
Hsieh, S., & Liu, H. (2008). Electrophysiological correlates of task conflicts in task-switching. Brain Research, 1203, 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2008.01.092
Hutchison, K. A. (2011). The interactive effects of listwide control, item-based control, and working memory capacity on Stroop performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(4), 851. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023437
Jacoby, L. L., Lindsay, D. S., & Hessels, S. (2003). Item-specific control of automatic processes: Stroop process dissociations. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10(3), 638–644. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03196526
Jamadar, S., Hughes, M., Fulham, W. R., Michie, P. T., & Karayanidis, F. (2010). The spatial and temporal dynamics of anticipatory preparation and response inhibition in task- switching. NeuroImage, 51(1), 432–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.01.090
Janowich, J. R., & Cavanagh, J. F. (2019). Immediate versus delayed control demands elicit distinct mechanisms for instantiating proactive control. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 19(4), 910–926. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-018-00684-x
Jost, K., Mayr, U., & Rösler, F. (2008). Is task switching nothing but cue priming? Evidence from ERPs. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.3758/cabn.8.1.74
Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Psychology, 14, 5–82.
Kalanthroff, E., Avnit, A., Henik, A., Davelaar, E. J., & Usher, M. (2015). Stroop proactive control and task conflict are modulated by concurrent working memory load. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 869–875. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0735-x
Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2003). Working-memory capacity and the control of attention: The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(1), 47–70. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.132.1.47
Kane, M. J., Hambrick, D. Z., Tuholski, S. W., Wilhelm, O., Payne, T. W., & Engle, R. W. (2004). The Generality of Working Memory Capacity: A Latent-Variable Approach to Verbal and Visuospatial Memory Span and Reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133(2), 189–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.189
Kang, M. S., & Chiu, Y. C. (2021). Proactive and reactive metacontrol in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 49(8), 1617–1632. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-021-01189-8
Kang, M. S., & Yu-Chin, C. (2022). Well under control: Control demand changes are sufficient for metacontrol. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1032304. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1032304
Kappenman, E. S., Farrens, J. L., Zhang, W., Stewart, A. X., & Luck, S. J. (2021). ERP CORE: An open resource for human event-related potential research. NeuroImage, 225, 117465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117465
Kappenman, E. S., & Luck, S. J. (2010). The effects of electrode impedance on data quality and statistical significance in ERP recordings. Psychophysiology, 47(5), 888–904. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01009.x
Karayanidis, F., & Jamadar, S. D. (2014). Event-related potentials reveal multiple components of proactive and reactive control in task switching. In J. A. Grange & G. Houghton (Eds.), Task switching and cognitive control (pp. 200–236). Oxford University Press.
Karayanidis, F., Jamadar, S., Ruge, H., Phillips, N., Heathcote, A., & Forstmann, B. U. (2010). Advance preparation in task-switching: Converging evidence from behavioral, brain activation, and model-based approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 25. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00025
Karayanidis, F., Mansfield, E. L., Galloway, K. L., Smith, J. L., Provost, A., & Heathcote, A. (2009). Anticipatory reconfiguration elicited by fully and partially informative cues that validly predict a switch in task. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 9(2), 202–215. https://doi.org/10.3758/cabn.9.2.202
Karayanidis, F., Provost, A., Brown, S., Paton, B., & Heathcote, A. (2011). Switch-specific and general preparation map onto different ERP components in a task-switching paradigm. Psychophysiology, 48(4), 559–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01115.x
Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching–a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 849–874. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019842
Kieffaber, P. D., & Hetrick, W. P. (2005). Event-related potential correlates of task switching and switch costs. Psychophysiology, 42, 56–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00262.x
Leboe, J. P., Wong, J., Crump, M., & Stobbe, K. (2008). Probe-specific proportion task repetition effects on switching costs. Perception & Psychophysics, 70(6), 935–945. https://doi.org/10.3758/pp.70.6.935
Lesh, T. A., Westphal, A. J., Niendam, T. A., Yoon, J. H., Minzenberg, M. J., Ragland, J. D., & Carter, C. S. (2013). Proactive and reactive cognitive control and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex dysfunction in first episode schizophrenia. NeuroImage: Clinical, 2, 590-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2013.04.010
Lindsay, D. S., & Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Stroop process dissociations: the relationship between facilitation and interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(2), 219. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.20.2.219
Liu, C., & Yeung, N. (2020). Dissociating expectancy-based and experience-based control in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(2), 131–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000704
Logan, G. D., & Zbrodoff, N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task. Memory & Cognition, 7(3), 166–1. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197535
Lopez-Calderon, J., & Luck, S. J. (2014). ERPLAB: An open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213
Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
Luck, S. J. (2022). Applied event-related potential data analysis. LibreTexts.
Mäki-Marttunen, V., Hagen, T., & Espeseth, T. (2019). Proactive and reactive modes of cognitive control can operate independently and simultaneously. Acta Psychologica, 199, 102891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.102891
Marini, F., Demeter, E., Roberts, K. C., Chelazzi, L., & Woldorff, M. G. (2016). Orchestrating proactive and reactive mechanisms for filtering distracting information: Brain-behavior relationships revealed by a mixed-design fMRI study. Journal of Neuroscience, 36(3), 988–1000. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.2966-15.2016
Mayr, U., Kuhns, D., & Rieter, M. (2013). Eye movements reveal dynamics of task control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(2), 489–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029353
Mayr, U., Spieler, D. H., & Hutcheon, T. G. (2015). When and why do old adults outsource control to the environment? Psychology and Aging, 30(3), 624–633. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039466
Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annual review of neuroscience, 24(1), 167–202. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
Monsell, S., & Mizon, G. A. (2006). Can the task-cuing paradigm mea- sure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(3), 493–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.493
Moreno-Martínez, F. J., & Montoro, P. R. (2012). An ecological alternative to Snodgrass & Vanderwart: 360 high quality colour images with norms for seven psycholinguistic variables. PLoS ONE, 7(5), 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0037527
Mueller, S. C., Swainson, R., & Jackson, G. M. (2007). Behavioural and neurophysiological correlates of bivalent and univalent responses during task switching. Brain Research, 1157, 56–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2007.04.046
Mueller, S. C., Swainson, R., & Jackson, G. M. (2009). ERP indices of persisting and current inhibitory control: A study of saccadic task switching. NeuroImage, 45(1), 191–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.11.019
Nagai, Y., Critchley, H. D., Featherstone, E., Fenwick, P. B., Trimble, M. R., & Dolan, R. J. (2004). Brain activity relating to the contingent negative variation: An fMRI investigation. Neuroimage, 21(4), 1232–1241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.10.036
Nicholson, R., Karayanidis, F., Bumak, E., Poboka, D., & Michie, P. T. (2006). ERPs dis- sociate the effects of switching task sets and task cues. Brain Research, 1095, 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.04.016
Nicholson, R., Karayanidis, F., Poboka, D., Heathcote, A., & Michie, P. (2005). Electrophysiological correlates of anticipatory task-switching processes. Psychophysiology, 42, 540–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00350.x
Paxton, J. L., Barch, D. M., Racine, C. A., & Braver, T. S. (2008). Cognitive control, goal maintenance, and prefrontal function in healthy aging. Cerebral Cortex, 18(5), 1010–1028. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhm135
Paxton, J. L., Barch, D. M., Storandt, M., & Braver, T. S. (2006). Effects of environmental support and strategy training on older adults’ use of context. Psychology and Aging, 21(3), 499–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.21.3.499
Pion-Tonachini, L., Kreutz-Delgado, K., & Makeig, S. (2019). ICLabel: An automated electroencephalographic independent component classifier, dataset, and website. NeuroImage, 198, 181–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.05.026
Redick, T. S., Calvo, A., Gay, C. E., & Engle, R. W. (2011). Working memory capacity and go/no-go task performance: selective effects of updating, maintenance, and inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(2), 308.
Richmond, L. L., Redick, T. S., & Braver, T. S. (2015). Remembering to prepare: The benefits (and costs) of high working memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(6), 1764. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000122
Rosahl, S. K., & Knight, R. T. (1995). Role of prefrontal cortex in generation of the contingent negative variation. Cerebral Cortex, 5(2), 123–134. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/5.2.123
Saville, C. W. N., Pawling, R., Trullinger, M., Daley, D., Intriligator, J., & Klein, C. (2011). On the stability of instability: Optimising the reliability of intra-subject variability of reaction times. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(2), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.034
Schneider, D. W., & Logan, G. D. (2006). Priming cue encoding by manipulating transition frequency in explicitly cued task switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(1), 145–151. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193826
Siqi-Liu, A., Egner, T., & Woldorff, M. G. (2022). Neural dynamics of context-sensitive adjustments in cognitive flexibility. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 34(3), 480–494. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_01813
Spinelli, G., & Lupker, S. J. (2020). Item-specific control of attention in the Stroop task: contingency learning is not the whole story in the item-specific proportion-congruent effect. Memory & Cognition, 48, 426–435.
Spinelli, G., Krishna, K., Perry, J. R., & Lupker, S. J. (2020). Working memory load dissociates contingency learning and item-specific proportion-congruent effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(11), 2007–2033. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000934
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of experimental psychology, 18(6), 643. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054651
Suh, J., & Bugg, J. M. (2021a). The shaping of cognitive control based on the adaptive weighting of expectations and experience. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 47(10), 1563. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001056
Suh, J., & Bugg, J. M. (2021b). On the automaticity of reactive item-specific control as evidenced by its efficiency under load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 47(7), 908–933. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000914
Swainson, R., Jackson, S. R., & Jackson, G. M. (2006). Using advance information in dynamic cognitive control: An ERP study of task-switching. Brain Research, 1105, 61–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2006.02.027
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37(3), 498–505. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03192720
Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: Inter- play of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019791
Van Veen, V., & Carter, C. S. (2002). The anterior cingulate as a conflict monitor: fMRI and ERP studies. Physiology & Behavior, 77(4–5), 477–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9384(02)00930-7.10.1016/S0031-9384(02)00930-7
West, R., Langley, M. M., & Bailey, K. (2011). Signaling a switch: Neural correlates of task switching guided by task cues and transition cues. Psychophysiology, 48, 612–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01123.x
Whitehead, P. S., Brewer, G. A., & Blais, C. (2017). ERP evidence for conflict in contingency learning. Psychophysiology, 54(7), 1031–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12864
Wiemers, E. A., & Redick, T. S. (2018). Working memory capacity and intra-individual variability of proactive control. Acta Psychologica, 182, 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2017.11.002
Wiwatowska, E., Czajeczny, D., & Michałowski, J. M. (2021). Decreased preparatory activation and inattention to cues suggest lower activation of proactive cognitive control among high procrastinating students. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-021-00945-2
Yang, Y., Miskovich, T. A., & Larson, C. L. (2018). State anxiety impairs proactive but enhances reactive control. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 2570. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02570
Yu-Chin, C. (2022). Task foreknowledge swallows item-specific but not list-wide control learning effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 66, 799–823. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001184
Acknowledgements
We thank the reviewers for their thorough reviews.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Kang, M.S., Yu-Chin, C. Concurrent expectation and experience-based metacontrol: EEG insights and the role of working memory capacity. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci (2024). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-024-01163-2
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-024-01163-2