Shifting set about task switching: behavioral and neural evidence for distinct forms of cognitive flexibility
Open accessAbstract
Task switching is an important aspect of cognitive control and understanding its underlying mechanisms is the focus of considerable research. In this paper, we contrast two different kinds of task switching paradigms and provide evidence that different cognitive mechanisms underlie switching behavior depending on whether the switch is between sets of rules (rule switch) or sets of features presented simultaneously (perceptual switch). In two experiments, we demonstrate that behavioral effects (Experiment 1) and neural recruitment (Experiment 2) vary with the type of switch performed. While perceptual switch costs occurred when the alternative feature set was physically present, rule switch costs were observed even in their absence. Rule switching was also characterized by larger target repetition effects and by greater engagement of the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. In contrast, perceptual switching was associated with greater recruitment of the parietal cortex. These results provide strong evidence for multiple forms of switching and suggest the limitations of generalizing results across shift types.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
These two shift types have different brain activation patterns.
“These two shift types are associated with different brain activation patterns.”
From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [49]
Not all switches are equivalent.
“Ravizza and Carter [49] have argued that all switches are not created equal”
From The paradox of cognitive flexibility in autism (2009) · cites this paper as [49]
The most commonly used cognitive neuroscience paradigms for studying cognitive flexibility require task switching or set-shifting.
“The most commonly used cognitive neuroscience paradigms for studying cognitive flexibility are those that require task switching or set-shifting (17–20).”
From Brain Mechanisms Supporting Flexible Cognition and Behavior in Adolescents With Autism Spectrum Disorder (2021) · cites this paper as [20]
Deficits in reversal learning associated with altered recruitment of fronto-striatal circuitry have been observed more consistently in OCD patients.
“Notably, deficits in reversal learning associated with altered recruitment of fronto‐striatal circuitry have been observed more consistently.31, 32, 33, 34, 35”
From Behavioral flexibility in a mouse model for obsessive‐compulsive disorder: Impaired Pavlovian reversal learning in SAPAP3 mutants (2019) · cites this paper as [33]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 53 · Cited by 200
- Authors
- Ravizza, S. M., & Carter, C. S.
- Affiliations
- Michigan State University (US)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Ravizza, Susan M.
- Venue
- Neuropsychologia
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-10
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2924-2935
- ISSN
- 0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC2553424
- OpenAlex
- W2000948160
- Cited by
- 200
- References
- 53
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 4.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- University of California, Davis
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH059883, K02MH064190)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
- Keywords
- task switching, cognitive flexibility, rule switching, perceptual switching, set-shifting, cognitive control, switch costs, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, parietal cortex, neural recruitment
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Attention, Brain Mapping, Cerebral Cortex, Cognition, Discrimination, Psychological, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Psychomotor Performance, Set, Psychology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review