Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

The influence of reward in the Simon task: Differences and similarities to the Stroop and Eriksen flanker tasks

View through CrossRef
AbstractPrevious studies have suggested that performance-contingent reward can modulate cognitive control by biasing irrelevant location-response associations in the Simon task. However, the influence of reward in the case of irrelevant words (Stroop task) or irrelevant flankers (Eriksen Flanker task) remains unclear. Across two preregistered experiments, the present study investigated the influence of reward on conflict processing with different types of distractors. Conflict effects on mean reaction time (RT) were reduced in the Simon task (Experiments 1 and 2) when incongruent versus congruent trials were rewarded, and this modulating effect of reward on conflict processing was also observed in the Eriksen flanker task (Experiment 2), but not in the Stroop task (Experiment 1). We propose that cognitive control adjustments to distractor-specific reward contingencies can be generalized across distractor types producing both perceptual-related (Flanker task) and motor-related (Simon task) conflict, but, if any, to a limited degree when distractors produce additional higher-level task conflict (Stroop task). In addition, distributional RT analyses (delta plots) revealed that rewarded distractor-response associations modulate cognitive control not only via biasing the strength (Simon and Eriksen tasks) but also the time-course of suppressing distractor processing (Eriksen task). Overall, the present study dissociated distractor-general and distractor-specific effects of reward on cognitive control.
Title: The influence of reward in the Simon task: Differences and similarities to the Stroop and Eriksen flanker tasks
Description:
AbstractPrevious studies have suggested that performance-contingent reward can modulate cognitive control by biasing irrelevant location-response associations in the Simon task.
However, the influence of reward in the case of irrelevant words (Stroop task) or irrelevant flankers (Eriksen Flanker task) remains unclear.
Across two preregistered experiments, the present study investigated the influence of reward on conflict processing with different types of distractors.
Conflict effects on mean reaction time (RT) were reduced in the Simon task (Experiments 1 and 2) when incongruent versus congruent trials were rewarded, and this modulating effect of reward on conflict processing was also observed in the Eriksen flanker task (Experiment 2), but not in the Stroop task (Experiment 1).
We propose that cognitive control adjustments to distractor-specific reward contingencies can be generalized across distractor types producing both perceptual-related (Flanker task) and motor-related (Simon task) conflict, but, if any, to a limited degree when distractors produce additional higher-level task conflict (Stroop task).
In addition, distributional RT analyses (delta plots) revealed that rewarded distractor-response associations modulate cognitive control not only via biasing the strength (Simon and Eriksen tasks) but also the time-course of suppressing distractor processing (Eriksen task).
Overall, the present study dissociated distractor-general and distractor-specific effects of reward on cognitive control.

Related Results

An examination of how reward associations differentially facilitate and impair Stroop performance
An examination of how reward associations differentially facilitate and impair Stroop performance
Behavioral performance is improved when the color of a Stroop stimulus is tied to a potential reward but is impaired when the irrelevant word meaning is reward related. The facilit...
Attentional Bias and Prediction of Attempted Suicide in Clinical and Non-clinical Population
Attentional Bias and Prediction of Attempted Suicide in Clinical and Non-clinical Population
Objective: the aim of the present research was to analyze the predictability of suicide attempts, based on attentional bias in a clinical and non-clinical population. Methods: 120 ...
Flanker and Simon effects interact at the response selection stage
Flanker and Simon effects interact at the response selection stage
The present study aimed at investigating the processing stage underlying stimulus–stimulus (S–S) congruency effects by examining the relation of a particular type of congruency eff...
An examination of how reward associations facilitate and impair Stroop performance
An examination of how reward associations facilitate and impair Stroop performance
Rewarded stimuli are prioritized by the attentional system. Behavioral performance is improved when the task-relevant dimension is tied to a potential reward but is impaired when t...
Flanker: a tool for comparative genomics of gene flanking regions
Flanker: a tool for comparative genomics of gene flanking regions
Abstract Analysing the flanking sequences surrounding genes of interest is often highly relevant to understanding the role of mobile genetic elem...
Reward does not facilitate visual perceptual learning until sleep occurs
Reward does not facilitate visual perceptual learning until sleep occurs
ABSTRACTA growing body of evidence indicates that visual perceptual learning (VPL) is enhanced by reward provided during training. Another line of studies has shown that sleep foll...
Reliability and validity analysis of color word test based on the smartphone program Stroop (Preprint)
Reliability and validity analysis of color word test based on the smartphone program Stroop (Preprint)
BACKGROUND The Stroop colorword test was developed by the American psychologist John Riddly Stroop as a result of his famous color naming experiment at 1935...
Neural Dynamics of Conflict Control in Working Memory
Neural Dynamics of Conflict Control in Working Memory
Abstract Attention and working memory (WM) have classically been considered as two separate cognitive functions, but more recent theories have conceptualized them as...

Back to Top