The results of our experiment were consistent with our hypothesis. Mean reaction times were slower for task-switch than repeat conditions, producing significant task-switching costs. We can infer that there is a significan relationship between task switch and task repeat. Reation times are dependent on task swotchin, therefore if task switch and task repeat variables are manipulated, a significant effect on reaction times exists.
The results of our experiment prove the predictions of the of the task-set reconfiguration hypothesis.
Task-switch costs are observed because doing more than one task at a time, especially more than one complex task, takes a toll on productivity. In the present study, the task cue and stimulus appeared simultaneously on each trial, and subjects were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible. Presumably, subjects took longer in task switching because they needed more time to mentally prepare. This possibility could be tested by manipulating how much time participants have to prepare for the upcoming task. For example, on some trials the task cue could appear simultaneously with the stimulus, and on other trials the task cue could appear several seconds before the stimulus, thus allowing participants enough time to mentally prepare. …show more content…
However, in a previous study done by Monsell (2003), even when people had to switch completely predictably between two tasks, they were still slower on task-switch than on task-repeat trials. Moreover, increasing the time available between trials for preparation reduced but did not eliminate the cost of switching. This creates flaws for the reconfiguration hypothesis. Thus, future research should investigate the differences between mental preparation and active preparation on task
The results of our experiment prove the predictions of the of the task-set reconfiguration hypothesis.
Task-switch costs are observed because doing more than one task at a time, especially more than one complex task, takes a toll on productivity. In the present study, the task cue and stimulus appeared simultaneously on each trial, and subjects were instructed to respond as quickly and accurately as possible. Presumably, subjects took longer in task switching because they needed more time to mentally prepare. This possibility could be tested by manipulating how much time participants have to prepare for the upcoming task. For example, on some trials the task cue could appear simultaneously with the stimulus, and on other trials the task cue could appear several seconds before the stimulus, thus allowing participants enough time to mentally prepare. …show more content…
However, in a previous study done by Monsell (2003), even when people had to switch completely predictably between two tasks, they were still slower on task-switch than on task-repeat trials. Moreover, increasing the time available between trials for preparation reduced but did not eliminate the cost of switching. This creates flaws for the reconfiguration hypothesis. Thus, future research should investigate the differences between mental preparation and active preparation on task