Cited by 612Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismVisual Attention and Saliency Detection

Congruency sequence effects and cognitive control

Open access
EGNER, T.·2007·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

Congruency effects in selective attention tasks are subject to sequential modulation: They are smaller following an incongruent stimulus than following a congruent one. This congruency sequence effect has been interpreted as reflecting conflict-driven adjustments in cognitive control (conflict adaptation) or, alternatively, episodic memory effects of stimulus-response association (feature integration). The present article critically reviews support for these rival accounts in the experimental literature and discusses the implications thereof for assessing behavioral and neural signatures of cognitive control processes. It is argued that both conflict adaptation and feature integration contribute to the congruency sequence effect but that their respective contributions can be isolated experimentally. Studies that have pursued this isolation strategy have gained important insights into cognitive control processes. Finally, other factors, such as expectancies, may also contribute to the congruency sequence effect, and thus their potential role needs to be carefully examined and, if found significant, integrated into current models of cognitive control.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/cabn.7.4.380

Cites

75 of 75 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Posner, M. I., & DiGirolamo, G. J. (1998). Executive attention: Con- flict, target detection, and cognitive control. In R. Parasuraman (Ed.), The attentive brain (pp. 401-423). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
EGNER, T.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
EGNER, T.
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2007-12-01
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
380-390
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W2039542908
Cited by
612
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 52 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 30 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 42 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 51 · 2012: 29
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Visual Attention and Saliency Detection
Keywords
congruency sequence effect, cognitive control, conflict adaptation, feature integration, stimulus-response associations, episodic memory, selective attention, expectancy, Stroop-like task
MeSH terms
Animals, Attention, Cognition, Electroencephalography, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Psychomotor Performance, Prefrontal Cortex

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