ELSEVIER
Neuropsychologia 44 (2006) 2037-2078
www elsevier comilocateineumpsychologia
Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years:
Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching
Matthew C. Davidson a'b, Dima Amso a, Loren Cruess Anderson c, Adele Diamond d,*
Sackler Institute for Developmental Psychobiologx frill Medical College of Cornell University; New York. NY. USA
b Department of Psychologx University of Massachusetts. Amherst. MA. USA
Shrive, Center. University of Massachusetts Medical School, Waltham. MA. USA
d Department of Psychiatrx University of British Columbia & Division of Child & Adolescent Psychiatty, BC Children's Hospital. Vancouver. Canada
Received 20 November 2005: received in revised form 7 February 2006: accepted 10 February 2006
Available online 31 March 2006
Abstract
Predictions concerning development, interrelations, and possible independence of working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility were
tested in 325 panicipants (roughly 30 per age from 4 to 13 years and young adults.. 50% female). All were tested on the same computerized battery.
designed to manipulate memory and inhibition independently and together. in steady state (single-task blocks) and during task-switching. and to
be appropriate over the lifespan and for neuroimaging (MARI). This is one of the first studies, in children or adults, to explore: (a) how memory
requirements interact with spatial compatibility and (b) spatial incompatibility effects both with stimulus-specific rules (Simon task) and with
higher-level, conceptual rules. Even the youngest children could hold information in mind, inhibit a dominant response. and combine those as long
as the inhibition required was steady-state and the rules remained constant. Cognitive flexibility (switching between rules), even with memory
demands minimized, showed a longer developmental progression. with 13-year-olds still not at adult levels. Effects elicited only in Mixed blocks
with adults were found in young children even in single-task blocks: while young children could exercise inhibition in steady state it exacted a
cost not seen in adults, who (unlike young children) seemed to re-set their default response when inhibition of the same tendency was required
throughout a block. The costs associated with manipulations of inhibition were greater in young children while the costs associated with increasing
memory demands were greater in adults. Effects seen only in RT in adults were seen primarily in accuracy in young children. Adults slowed down
on difficult trials to preserve accuracy: but the youngest children were impulsive; their RT remained more constant but at an accuracy cost on
difficult trials. Contrary to our predictions of independence between memory and inhibition, when matched for difficulty RT correlations between
these were as high as 0.8. although accuracy correlations were less than half that. Spatial incompatibility effects and global and local switch costs
were evident in children and adults, differing only in size. Other effects (e.g.. asymmetric switch costs and the interaction of switching rules and
switching response-sites) differed fundamentally over age.
O 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Task switching: Inhibition: Working memory: Simon effect: Asymmetric switch costs: Global and local switch costs: Stimulus—response compatibility:
Development: Children: Frontal lobe
Mature cognition is characterized by abilities that include
being able: (a) to hold information in mind, including compli-
cated representational structures, to mentally manipulate that
information, and to act on the basis of it, (b) to act on the basis
of choice rather than impulse, exercising self-control (or self-
regulation) by resisting inappropriate behaviors and responding
• Corresponding author at: Department of Psychiatry. University of British
Columbia. 2255 Wesbrook Mall. Vancouver. BC. Canada V6T 2AL
Tel.: +1 604 822 7220: fax: +1 604 822 7232.
E-mail address: adele.diamondaubc.ca (A. Diamond).
0028-3932(8 — see front matter O 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006
appropriately, and (c) to quickly and flexibly adapt behavior
to changing situations. These abilities are referred to respec-
tively as working memory, inhibition, and cognitive flexibility.
Together they are key components of both "cognitive control"
and "executive functions" and have been studied in a wide vari-
ety of experimental paradigms with diverse subject groups.
Our battery of interrelated tasks enabled us to indepen-
dently and systematically vary demands on these abilities and
to track their development across a wider age range than hereto-
fore investigated using the same measures at all ages. Hav-
ing measures that span a wide age range is important given
the protracted developmental progressions of many executive
EFTA01098878
2038
MC. Davidson e at /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
function and cognitive control skills. While some cognitive
abilities develop early, executive functions do not reach their
peak until early adulthood (DeLuca et al., 2003; Diamond,
2002; Fischer, Biscaldi, & Gezeck, 1997; Harnishfeger & Pope,
1996; Kail, 1991abc; Kail & Salthouse, 1994; Luciana &
Nelson, 2002; Luciana, Conklin, Hooper, & Yarger, 2005; Luna,
Garver, Urban, Lazar, & Sweeney, 2004; Lyons-Warren, Lillie,
& Hershey, 2004; Munoz, Broughton, Goldring, & Armstrong,
1998; Zelazo, Craik, & Booth, 2004). Each test in our battery
can be performed by children as young as 4 years; yet adults
still find many of them challenging. The entire battery takes
less than 30 min to complete. These tests are also designed
to be appropriate for testing nonhuman primates and for neu-
roimaging research using functional magnetic resonance imag-
ing (fMRI) (Diamond, O'Craven, & Savoy, 1998; O'Craven,
Savoy, & Diamond, 1998).
Across this wide age span, our battery provides within-
subject measures of two classic paradigms in cognitive psy-
chology, the Simon task and task switching. In the Simon task
paradigm, a non-spatial aspect of the stimulus (such as its
color or identity) is relevant and its spatial location is irrele-
vant. Nevertheless, the well-replicated finding in adults is that
responses are faster and more often correct when the stimu-
lus and response are on the same side than when they are on
opposite sides (the Simon effect, also called spatial incompati-
bility or stimulus—response compatibility; e.g., Craft & Simon,
1970; Fitts and Seger, 1953; Hommel, 1995; Hommel, Proctor,
& Vu, 2004; Lu & Proctor, 1995; Simon & Small, 1969; Simon,
1990; Simon & Berbaum, 1990). This effect indicates: (a) the
influence of an irrelevant stimulus attribute on performance and
(b) a prepotent tendency to respond on the same side as the
stimulus (confirmed at the neuronal level [see Georgopoulos,
1994; Georgopoulos, Lurito, Petrides, Schwartz, & Massey,
19891 and with lateralized readiness potentials [Valle-Inclan,
19961) which must be inhibited when the locations of stimu-
lus and response are incompatible. It thus provides insight into
an aspect of inhibitory control. A finding that the Simon effect
decreases over a certain age range provides evidence for when
developmental improvement in that aspect of inhibition occurs
and insight into when maturational changes in the neural sys-
tem underlying that might be occurring. That neural system
overlaps substantially with the neural system activated during
Stroop interference and other cognitive control paradigms. It
includes the anterior cingulate, lateral prefrontal cortex (dorso-
lateral and ventrolateral), pre-SMA, premotor cortex, posterior
and superior parietal cortex, inferior temporal cortex, the insula,
and precuneus (Bush, Shin, Holmes. Rosen, & Vogt, 2003;
Dassonville et al., 2001; Fan, Flombaum, McCandliss, Thomas,
& Posner, 2003; lacoboni, Woods, & Mazziotta, 1998; Liu,
Banich, Jacobson, & Tanabe, 2004; Maclin Gratton, & Fabiani,
2001; Peterson et al., 2002; Thomas et al., 1999; Wager & Smith,
2003).
We investigated spatial incompatibility effects both decreas-
ing and increasing the working memory requirements tradition-
ally required for Simon tasks. We decreased it in one case by
providing icons depicting stimuli A and B over their respective
response-sites so that which response goes with which stimulus
did not have to be held in mind and in another case by using
stimuli (Arrows) that pointed to where to respond. We increased
the working memory requirements by introducing conceptual
rules, where the correct response required mental manipulation.
Instead of a rule being "for A press left:' a rule was "for A
press on the side opposite A:' Thus, in addition to activating
the rules associated with the two stimuli (the memory require-
ment in standard Simon tasks), participants had to instantiate the
appropriate rule for the particular spatial location of the stimulus
on each trial.
Task-switching paradigms target the ability to flexibly shift
from one mindset to another, often times acting according to
rules that would be incompatible with the other mindset. This
has been studied extensively in adults (e.g., Allport, Styles, &
Hsieh. 1994; Jersild, 1927; Meiran, Gotler, & Perlman, 1996;
Monsell & Driver, 2000; Rogers & Monsell, 1995; Meiran
et al., 2000a,b; Meiran, 2005; Spector & Biederman, 1976;
Sudevan & Taylor, 1987), including the elderly (e.g., Kramer,
Hahn, & Gopher, 1999; Mayr, 1996; Meimn, Gotler, & Perlman,
2001), and in various clinical groups (e.g., Aron, Sahakian,
& Robbins, 2003; Brown & Marsden, 1988; Downes et al.,
1989; Flowers & Robertson, 1985; Hayes, Davidson, Rafal &
Keele, 1998; Mecklinger, von Cramon, Springer, & Mantles-
von Cramon, 1999; Rogers et al., 1998). However, to date,
only a handful of studies have looked at task switching in chil-
dren (Cepeda, Kramer, & Gonzalez de Sather, 2001; Cohen,
Bixenman, Meiran, & Diamond, 2001; Crone, Bunge, Van der
Molen, & Ridderinkhof, in press; Crone, Ridderinkhof, Worm,
Somsen, & van der Molen, 2004; Reimers & Maylor, 2005;
Zelazo, Craik, & Booth, 2004).
Switching is fundamentally difficult and a paradigmatic
instance of when top-down executive control is required
because generally it cannot be done "on automatic:' It taxes
both working memory and inhibition (the newly-relevant
rules and stimulus-response relations must be activated and
the previously-relevant ones suppressed). One cannot get in the
"groove" of repeatedly doing the same thing or staying in the
same mindset because periodically one will have to change that.
A groove is a good analogy because it takes effort to climb over
the banks of the groove (the mindset) one is in and settle, however
temporarily, into another grove. Neuroimaging studies confirm
that task-switching (as opposed to continuing to do the same
task) activates the neural system associated with executive func-
tion and top-down cognitive control, that is lateral prefrontal
cortex (dorsolateral and ventrolateral), inferior frontal junction
(IFJ) and premotor cortex, pre-SMA and the anterior cingu-
late, and the insula and cerebellum (Brass et al., 2003; Brass,
Derrfuss, Forstmann, & von Cramon, 2005; Braver, Reynolds, &
Donaldson, 2003; Crone, Wendelken, Donohue, & Bunge, 2005;
DiGirolamo et al., 2001; Dove, Pollmann, Schubert, Wiggins,
& von Cramon, 2000; Dreher & Berman, 2002; Dreher &
Grafman, 2003; Kimberg, Aguirre, & D'Esposito, 2000; Meyer
et al., 1998; Omori et al., 1999; Pollmann, 2001; Sohn, Ursu,
Anderson, Stenger, & Carter, 2000; Sylvester et al., 2003; Wager,
Reading, & Jonides, 2004). Consistent with this, patients with
frontal cortex damage are impaired at switching between tasks
(Mon, Monsell, Sahakian, & Robbins, 2004; Diedrichsen, Mayr,
EFTA01098879
M.C. Davidson es nl. /Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2039
Dhaliwal, Keele. & Ivry, 2000; Keele & Rafal, 2000; Owen et
al., 1993; Rogers et al., 1998; Shallice & Burgess, 1991).
We report here on the developmental progression in almost
300 children from 4 to 13 years of age and the performance
of young adults for comparison, all tested on the same test
battery. Various manipulations exploited task switching and spa-
tial incompatibility effects, with and without an added memory
component, or taxed memory without taxing inhibition or task
switching, enabling us to test predictions concerning interre-
lations, independence, and the developmental progressions of
working memory (how much information you must hold in
mind and how many steps must be mentally executed using that
information), inhibition (resisting an incorrect response you are
inclined to make in order to make the correct response), and
cognitive flexibility (switching between tasks or rules). The pre-
dictions we tested were generated from hypotheses concerning
inhibition and working memory and hypotheses concerning cog-
nitive flexibility and task switching.
1. Hypotheses relevant to inhibition and working
memory
We hypothesized that inhibition would exact a greater relative
cost for young children than for older children or young adults,
and thus predicted that inhibitory demands would account for a
greater proportion of the variance in children's performance than
in adults, and the more so the younger the child. In young adults,
in whom inhibitory control is more mature, we hypothesized
that memory demands would exact a greater cost than inhibitory
demands.
Because we hypothesized that inhibitory control is extremely
problematic for very young children, we predicted they would
perform poorly on all trials requiring inhibition (Incongruent
trials and switch trials) and that those effects would be addi-
tive. We predicted that older children and adults would show
the same "asymmetric switch costs" (a greater relative switch
cost for switching to the easier [Congruent] condition) previ-
ously reported in adults (Allport & Wylie, 2000; Allport et al.,
1994; De long, 1995; Kleinsorge & Heuer, 1999; Los, 19%;
Stoffels, 1996; Wylie & Allport, 2000). Further, for slightly
older children, who are beginning to exercise better inhibitory
control, doing so should require greater effort than in older
participants. Hence, we predicted that undoing that inhibition
(switching back to making a dominant response) should exact
a greater cost in those children than in adults. Thus, we pre-
dicted that beginning after 6 or 7 years, asymmetric switch
costs would be larger in younger than older participants, but
that the youngest children would show an opposite pattern of
asymmetry.
The ability to simply hold items in mind (without any added
requirement to manipulate that information or exercise inhibi-
tion) develops early, is robust even in preschoolers, and shows
little improvement with age (Brown, 1975; Dempster, 1985;
Diamond, 1995). Given the early maturation of the ability to
hold items in mind, we predicted that although it would be harder
for everyone to hold more items in mind than fewer, the relative
difficulty of that would not change over age.
Finally, Diamond (1991, 2002) and others (Anderson &
Spellman, 1995; Gemsbacher & Faust, 1991; Hasher, Stoltzfus,
Zacks, & Rypma, 1991) have hypothesized that working mem-
ory and inhibition are separable functions. This is consistent
with the results of the factor analyses of Miyake et al. (2000) that
found working memory and inhibition to be moderately corre-
lated but clearly separable. Many scholars, however, have argued
that there is no need to postulate an inhibitory function separate
from working memory and have produced neural network mod-
els consistent with that (Cohen, Dunbar, & McClelland, 1990;
Kimberg & Farah, 1993; Miller & Cohen, 2001; Morton &
Munakata, 2002; Munakata, 2000). Given that we hypothesized
that working memory and inhibition are independent, we pre-
dicted that performance on tasks that tax primarily memory or
primarily inhibition would not be highly correlated, and tested
this for relatively easy tasks and for relatively difficult tasks
requiring primarily memory or primarily inhibition, matched on
difficulty.
2. Hypotheses relevant to cognitive flexibility and task
switching
Diamond (1990, 1991, 2002) has long maintained that it is
the conjunction of simultaneous demands on holding informa-
tion in mind and inhibition that is truly difficult, especially if
one's mental settings have to be continually re-set because the
task changes. We thus predicted that the most difficult condition
at all ages would be the one that taxes inhibition and memory in
a switching context, where top-down executive control is con-
tinually required, and that that would be even more difficult than
having to hold three times as much information in mind but with
no inhibition or switching component. Further, since we hypoth-
esized that switching is so difficult, we predicted that having to
switch between task sets would show a long developmental pro-
gression even when memory demands are minimized.
Diamond has recently theorized that several seemingly inde-
pendent findings in cognitive psychology can be integrated under
the hypothesis that the brain and mind tend to work at a grosser
level, and only with effort, or more optimal functioning, work
in a more selective manner (a theory Diamond has called "all
or none" (Diamond, 2005, in preparation)). For example, it is
easier to take into account all salient aspects of a stimulus than
only some of its properties. Indeed, it is difficult to ignore irrele-
vant properties of an attended stimulus, as the Simon effect and
children's difficulties on card sorting tasks so amply demon-
strate (Diamond, Carlson, & Beck, 2005; Kirkham, Cruess, &
Diamond, 2003).
Another finding that fits under the all or none rubric is that
it is easier to inhibit a dominant response all the time than only
some of the time. One of the most demanding cognitive require-
ments is to switch back and forth, to overcome inertial tendencies
favoring staying in the "groove" one is in (Kirkham et al., 2003).
Once in a "groove," even if it was a difficult one to settle into
(because it required resisting a tendency to act otherwise, for
example) it is not that difficult to continue along that path. It
is re-mapping stimulus—response associations, changing mind-
sets, that is quite difficult (Brass et al., 2003; Fagot 1994; Los,
EFTA01098880
2040
M.C. Davidson et al. /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
1996, 1999; Schuch & Koch, 2003, 2004; Wannk, Hommel, &
Allport, 2003). We thus predicted that performance at all ages
would be better in Incongruent-only blocks (where inhibition is
consistently required on all trials) than in Mixed blocks (where
inhibition is only required on the 50% of trials that are Incon-
gruent), and that this difference would be greater the younger
the children. This might seem obvious, but most studies of the
classic Stroop effect still tend to administer the conditions in
single-task blocks (read all the words or state the ink color of
all the words), missing the most difficult condition (switching
between having to read the words and having to state the ink
color).
A further seemingly independent finding that provides
another example of the all or none principle is that it is eas-
ier to switch everything, or nothing, than to switch one thing
(e.g., the rule or the response) but not the other (Hommel et al.,
2001; Kleinsorge, 1999; Meiran, 2000a,b; Rogers & Monsell,
1995; Schuch & Koch, 2004). Similarly, if you are supposed to
press the color opposite to a stimulus it is easier to also press the
button on the side opposite to the stimulus (rather than the typ-
ical bias to respond on the same side as the stimulus; Hedge &
Marsh, 1975). Issuing a global "change" or "opposite" command
to all systems appears to be preferred by our neural machinery
over a more selective command to just the action system or to
just one aspect of cognition. This has been demonstrated not
only in young adults, but also in older adults (Mayr, 2001) and
children (Crone et al., in press). We predicted that we would
demonstrate these effects, heretofore documented only in adults
and older children, even in young children. Thus, we predicted
that throughout our age span, participants would do better at
switching tasks if the response-site also changed and would be
slower and less accurate on switch trials when the response-site
remained the same as on the previous trial.
Another way of putting some of the above points is that con-
text matters. For example, even "easy" trials do not seem so
easy when they are presented in the context of switching between
those and "harder trials. Knowing that sometimes you will have
to switch can cause you to slow down (and perhaps err more) on
trials where you do not have to switch. Local context matters; it
matters what trials came before a particular trial. For example,
was the rule on the preceding trial the same as on the current
trial? Performance is better on nonswitch than on switch tri-
als. Was the response-site on the preceding trial the same as on
the current trial? Studies in adults have shown that performance
is better on nonswitch, same-response-site trials than on non-
switch, response-site-switch trials and on rule-switch, response-
site-switch trials than on rule-switch, same-response-site trials.
We predicted a different pattern in the youngest children and a
more exaggerated version of the adult pattern in slightly older
children (see above).
Global context also matters; it matters what kind of trial block
a given trial occurs in. Performance on the same type of trial
(e.g., Congruent, Incongruent) in the same type of local con-
text (e.g., nonswitch) varies depending on the larger context
(e.g., a single-task block or Mixed block). Performance even on
"easy" nonswitch trials (where the rule on the present trial is the
same as on the previous trial) is usually slower and less accurate
when they are presented in the context of having to periodically
switch between rules than in a block of all nonswitch trials.
Such global switch costs (the difference in performance on non-
switch trials in a Mixed block versus in a single-task block; Fagot
1994, Mar, 2000) have been shown to be greater for elders than
for younger adults (Kray, Eber, & Lindenberger, 2004; Kray &
Lindenberger, 2000; Mayr, 2000; van Asselen & Ridderinkhof,
2000) and higher for children than for young adults (Cepeda
et al., 2001; Cohen et al., 2001; Reimers & Maylor, 2005),
though this has not been investigated in children as young as the
youngest tested here and though some studies have not found an
age difference in global switch costs (Crone et al., in press; Kray,
Li, & Lindenberger, 2002). We predicted that global switch costs
would not only be found in our youngest participants but would
be more exaggerated the younger the child.
Because of floor effects (subjects should already be slower
and more error-prone in the Incongruent-only block), the effect
of context (the Mixed block versus single-task block) should
be greater on Congruent than Incongruent trials. We predicted
that this would be more evident the younger the child. Thus,
performance on "easy" (Congruent, nonswitch) trials should fall
closer and closer to the level of "harder" trials in the context of
sometimes having to switch back and forth the younger the child.
3. Methods
3.1. Participants
A total of 325 individuals participated. ranging in age from 4 to 45 years.
Of these. I 1 children were excluded from the analyses for failing to press any
button or consistently pressing both. Of the remaining 314 participants. 50%
were female (157 female. 157 male). Table 1 shows the number and gender of
participants in each of the age groups. Children were recruited through local
preschool and elementary school programs in the suburban Boston area. Adults
Table 1
Number of participants within each age and gender group
Age group'
(years)
Mean age
(years)
S.U.
N
Gender
Female
Male
4
4.43
0.25
30
14
16
5
5.19
0.17
30
14
16
6h
6.01
0.40
30
15
15
6h
6.22
0.35
30
12
IS
7
7.12
0.20
30
13
17
8
7.97
0.28
30
10
10
9
9.07
0.30
30
17
13
10
9.92
0.30
30
13
17
II
11.01
0.32
28
II
17
13
12.89
1.21
26
17
9
Adults
26.30
5.40
20
14
6
Total number of
participants
314
157
157
4 The age groups were used for illustrative purposes when preparing graphs.
All regression analyses used the actual ages of participants and treated age as a
continuous variable.
b TWo groups of 6-year-old children were tested to study the effects of short
vs. long presentation time at this intermediate age. For one group. stimulus
presentation time was 2501 ms. the slower version used with younger children.
For the second group. stimulus presentation time was 750 nu, the faster version
used with older children and adults.
EFTA01098881
ACC. Davidson et al. /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006) 2037-2078
2011
were recruited from within the Eunice Kennedy Shrivcr Center in Waltham. MA.
The majority of participants were Caucasian and from middle to upper middle
class families. Informed consent was obtained from all adult participants and
from a parent of each child participant: assent was obtained from the younger
children and consent from the olderones. All participants received a small, token
present for their participation.
3.2. Procedures common to all tests in our batten•
All tasks were presented on a Macintosh computer using MacStim to
present the stimuli and record responses. Participants held a button box
(10cm x 14 cm x 3 cm) with both hands and used their thumbs to press the two
response buttons. For each task a horizontal rectangle (6 cm x 18 cm) with a cen-
tral fixation cross was presented on the computer screen (25cm x 33 cm). Only
one stimulus was presented per trial and participants were positioned approxi-
mately 50cm from the screen.
Participants completed a set of four related tests designed to manipulate
demands on working memory and inhibitor)• control (see Fig. I ). For adults and
older children (>7 years). stimulus presentation time was 750ms. For younger
children (4-6 years). stimulus presentation time was 2500ms. In all cases the
interstimulus interval was 500 ms. resulting in total trial durations of 1250 and
3000 ms. respectively. An additional group of 6-year-oldchildren was tested with
the short (adult) presentation time (750ms) to study the effects of presentation
time at this intermediate age.
Each task began with condition-specific instructions and a short practice
block consisting of four or six trials. Different numbers of trials were used to
allow presentation of all relevant trial types within each practice block. Partic-
ipants could repeat the practice trials if needed to demonstrate learning of the
requirements for a given task. Most children learned the task requirements with
one practice block and no participant needed more than two practice blocks.
The criterion for demonstrating learning was 75-80% correct on the practice
trials and to be able to verbally tell the experimenter the rules. Testing blocks
contained 20 trials and each participant completed 1 block for each condition
of each task. except for the 2 conditions of the Abstract Shapes task. each of
which contained 2 blocks (with a shoo break in between) for a total of 40 trials
for each condition. The set of tests was administered with Arrows first. then
Dots. Abstract Shapes (two then six shapes). and finally Pictures. A subset of
participants were tested with Arrows presented last and Pictures presented first
to check for order effects. but this did not affect performance. so results for both
orders of presentation are collapsed together in the results reported here.
3.3. Procedures specifie le individual tests
3.3.1. Pictures
This test is a classic Simon task. Here, a color picture of either a frog or
butterfly was presented on the left or right side of the computer screen(see Fig. I).
Each stimulus had an associated right or left response. The exact instructions
given participants were: "If you sec a butterfly, press the button on the left.
whether the butterfly appears on the left or right: if you see a frog. press the
button on to the right. whether the frog appears on the left of right:' Small
versions of the stimuli were attached next to the correct buttons on the response
box to minimize the need to remember which stimulus was associated with which
button. The stimuli were presented randomly on the left or right of the screen
over the block of 20 trials, yielding Congruent (compatible) and Incongruent
(incompatible) trials.
3.3.2. Arrows
Here. a single large arrow was presented at the left or right of the computer
screen. The arrow pointed either straight down (toward the response button on
the same side as the arrow) or toward the opposite side at a 45' angle (toward the
response button on the opposite side: see Fig. 0.0n Congruent trials. the arrow
pointed straight down and participants were to respond on the same side as the
arrow. On Incongruent trials. the arrow pointed diagonally toward the opposite
side and participants were to respond on the side opposite the arrow. The precise
instructions participants were told were. "1 want you to push the button the arrow
is pointing toward. If the arrow is on the side of the box pointing down like this
IE demonstrated] to this button. press this button. If the arrow is on the other side
pointing down like this IE demonstrated] to this button. press this button. If the
arrow is on this side. pointing down across the screen like this IE demonstrated]
to this button. press this button. If the arrow is on the other side. pointing down
across the screen like this IE demonstrated] to this button. press this button:'
Congruent and Incongruent trials were presented in a randomized Mixed block
of 20 trials. This requires inhibiting the tendency to respond on the same side as
the stimulus when a diagonal arrow appears. but it requires little or no working
memory. as the arrow points directly to the correct response button on all trials.
3.3.3. Dols
The Dots test was designed to tax both working memory and inhibition.
while the other tests were designed to tax primarily either working memory
or inhibition, not both. Here, a large dot (diameter = 2_5 cm). was presented
either at the left or right on each trial (sec Fig. I). Two types of Dots (striped
or solid) were used. Striped Dots contained vertical black and white stripes.
while solid Dots were a uniform gray color. These Dots were equated for visual
characteristics such as size and luminance. For half of the participants a striped
dot indicated they should make a response on the same side as the dot while
a gray dot indicated they should respond on the side opposite the dot. These
rules were reversed for the other half of the participants. An initial block of 20
Congruent trials (with all responses on the same side as the dot) was followed
by a block of 20 Incongruent trials (with all responses on the side opposite the
dot), and then by a Mixed block of 20 trials where Congruent and opposite
trials were randomly intermixed. Instructions and practice were given before
the Congruent and Incongruent blocks. Instructions alone were given before the
Mixed block. e.g.. "Remember. gray same side: striped opposite: Memory is
required on all trials of the Dots test to remember the rules (respond on the same
or opposite side as the dot I. Inhibition is required on Incongruent trials to inhibit
the prepotent response to respond on the same side as the visual stimulus. This
task is similar to one used by Shaffer (1965) though there each subject received
only one type of trial block (Congruent. Incongruent. or Mixed) and therefore
subjects did not have the benefit of testing with the two easier trial blocks before
receiving the Mixed block. The Dots task is also similar to a task used by Vu and
Proctor (2004) but the rules for their single-task blocks did not refer to stimulus
appearance and so the memory demand in their Mixed condition might have
been greater than in ours.
3.3.4. Abstract Shapes
In the Abstract Shapes test. unlike all other tests.each stimulus was presented
in the center of the rectangle. Participants were taught a rule for each stimulus
("for this one press the left button": "for this one press right") during short prac-
tice blocks before each testing condition. There were two conditions involving
two- or six-Abstract-Shapes. Participants first completed the two-shapes condi-
tion (2 blocks of 20 trials) and were then taught 4 additional rules. for a total
of 6 shapes. and were then tested on another two blocks of 20 trials. The six-
Abstract-Shapes condition taxes memory heavily (participants must hold six
rules in mind). but it requires little or no inhibition (as the stimuli appear at the
center of the screen and do not preferentially activate the right or left hand).
4. Results: general comments
The three dependent measures were percentage of correct
responses (accuracy), speed (reaction time MTH, and percent-
age of anticipatory responses (AR). Linear regressions were used
for all analyses involving age and each subject's exact age was
entered, not simply the person's age grouping. Within-subject
ANOVAs were used for analyses comparing tasks, conditions
within task, or trial types. All binary comparisons included
Tukey corrections for multiple comparisons. Whenever the vari-
ance structure did not conform to the requirements for parametric
analyses, logarithmic or arc sine transformations of the data were
used to obtain the required conformity. All tables and figures
present the raw, untransfonned data.
A response time faster than 200 ms was considered antic-
ipatory (too fast to be in response to the stimulus). Those
EFTA01098882
2012
MC. Davidson et at /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
Press Left
Press Right
with ARBITRARY STIMULI
•
Press Right
•
Press Left
with ICONIC STIMULI
Press -elf
4]
Press Right
Press Left
Press Right
that is a CLASSICAL SIMON TASK
4
Press Left
Press Rignt
MEMORY LOAD
Low
Medium
High
Low
e
Press Right
4
Press Left
Press Left
Press Right
Press Right
Press Right
Press Left
Press Left
Medium
High
Dots-Congruent
Dots-Incongruent.
Pictures
Arrows
2-Abstract-Shapes
Dots-Mixed
6-Abstract-Shapes
These 2 cells are logically possible. e.g . 6-Abstract Side (a
'Simon" task with 3 stimuli per response button) would be High
Memory! Medium Inhib. However such tasks are too difficult
Fig. I. Illustration of the tasks in our battery with a table summarizing the demands of each on memory and inhibition.
EFTA01098883
M.C. Davidson et at. /Neuroptychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2043
responses were excluded from analyses of accuracy or speed,
but were included in analyses of anticipatory responses (ARs).
ARs occurred when a participant was either too eager and
failed to wait for the stimulus on the current trial or failed to
release the button following the previous trial. These anticipa-
tory responses indicate inhibitory failures and are reported as a
percentage of all possible responses where appropriate. A trial
was considered correct if: (a) the first response following a stim-
ulus was correct and (b) RT was >200 ms following stimulus
onset.
The percentage of correct responses was calculated by divid-
ing the number of correct responses by the sum of correct
plus incorrect responses. Anticipatory responses were excluded
from that calculation. The median RI' for correct responses
only was calculated for each participant. The median value,
rather than the mean value, was used to reduce the effect of
outlying RI's.
The youngest children received a slower version of our tasks
than the rest of the children and adults. The stimuli were pre-
sented to the 4- and 5-year-olds and one group of 6-year-olds for
much longer than they were presented to the rest of the children
and adults (trial durations of 3000 and 1250 ms, respectively).
Analyses over all ages might exaggerate RT differences over
age (since children given longer to respond will naturally take
longer) and might underestimate accuracy differences (since
children given longer to respond are likely to make fewer errors).
Hence, analyses of age differences are reported separately for
the youngest children tested with a presentation time of 2500 ms
and for all other participants tested with a presentation time of
750 ms.
The effects of gender, and interactions of gender with age,
were tested in all analyses. Significant effects were not found.
Independent age-related regressions for male and female partic-
ipants showed comparable R2 values across the three dependent
measures for all tests.
5. Results: basic level results for the tasks that included
an inhibitory component (Pictures, Arrows, and Dots)
5.1. Pictures
The Pictures test was designed to provide a measure of the
Simon effect in children. It tests the effect of an inhibitory
demand (resisting the impulse to respond on the same side as
the stimulus) with little or no working memory demand since
small icons were attached above the appropriate response keys
to indicate the correct response for each stimulus. The older the
subjects, the better their performance (see Table 2). This was
highly significant when all ages were included in the analyses
(p <0.0001 for each of the three dependent variables) and for
ages 6 years through adults tested with the brief presentation time
(accuracy: F(1,222)= 17.93, p < 0.0001; RT: F(1,222) = 35.36,
p <0.0001; anticipatory responses: F(1,222) = 10.8, p <0.001),
the effect of age being particularly marked on speed of respond-
ing. The youngest children (4-6 years of age) improved in speed
and reduced anticipatory responses on the task over age, but
given a long time to respond showed no difference over age in
accuracy (RT: F(1,88)=4.58, p < 0.04; anticipatory responses:
F(1,88) = 6.07, p <0.02).
5.2. Arrows
The Arrows test was designed to require inhibitory control
when a response was required on the side opposite the stimulus
but to require little or no working memory as the stimuli them•
selves point to the correct response button. Performance was
better as a function of age, with increased accuracy, increased
speed, and reduced anticipatory responses (Table 2). This was
highly significant for accuracy and anticipatory responses when
all ages were included in the analyses but not significant for
speed of responding (accuracy: F(1,312)=57.06; p<0.0001;
AR: F(1,312) = 35.73, p <0.0001). When the youngest children,
tested with a long presentation time, were removed from the
analyses, the age-related improvements in speed, as well as accu-
racy and reduced incidence of anticipatory responses, were sig-
nificant at p <0.0001 (F(1,222) = 76.88 [%correct]; 36.07 MTh
38.56 [AM). The youngest children (4-6 years of age) showed
a steady reduction in anticipatory responses, and 6-year-olds
responded correctly significantly more often than children of 4
or 5 years, but there was no difference over the age range of 4-6
years in response speed (accuracy: F( 1,88) = 10.69; p <0.005;
AR: F(I ,88) = 6.5, p <0.02).
5.3. Dots
In the Dots test there were three conditions (Congru-
ent, Incongruent, and Mixed). Performance in each condition
improved significantly as a function of age, with increased accu-
racy and speed, and reduced anticipatory responses the older the
participants (see Fig. 2). Unless othenvise noted, all results in the
next three paragraphs for improvement over age are significant
at p < 0.0001.
For the Congruent condition, performance improved over age
in the percentage of correct responses, RT. and reduced antici-
patory responses (F(1,312) = 34.68. 116.97, and 8.42 (p < 0.05
for AR), respectively with all subjects in the analyses). The
corresponding results for only those tested with the 750-ms
stimulus presentation time (6-year-olds through adults) are
F(1,222) = 14.33 (p < 0.001), 55.05, and 2.59 (NS for AR). The
corresponding results for only those tested with the 2500-ms pre-
sentation time (children of 4-6 years) are F(1,88) = 18.19 and
8.54 (p <0.005), and 18.52.
For the Incongruent condition, with all subjects included,
performance improved over age in accuracy (F(1,312)=46.60),
speed (F(1,312) = 110.76), and reduced anticipatory responses
(F(1,312)=39.77). The corresponding results for those ≥6
years of age are F(1,222)=33.09, 47.21, and 24.33. The
corresponding results for those 4-6 years of age are
F(1,88) = 7.76 (p < 0.005), <I (NS), and 15.07.
For the Mixed condition, the results for improvement
over age with all subjects included in the analyses are
F(1,312)=66.65 (%correct), 62.15 (RT), and 42.84 (AR).
For only those ≥6 years of age, the corresponding results are
F(1,222)=61.95, 10.68, and 31.51. For only those 4-6 years of
EFTA01098884
2044
MC. Davidson et at. /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
Table 2
Table of means for each of the task conditions by age of the participants
Task condition
Age in years
Average Tukey
results
4
5
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
26
Accuracy (percentage of correct responses)
Pictures
91.67
87.59
93.92
88.07
85.26
88.03
86.14
91.45
91.08
92.25
100.00
98.23
A
Arrows
83.36
79.11
90.22
77.87
73.67
77.97
80.22
78.38
84.63
88.19
95.19
90.06
B
Dots
Congruent
96.33
94.96
98.61
96.00
96.86
99.65
99.30
99.67
99.62
99.55
98.50
91.47
B
Incongruent
86.93
86.12
92.62
88.05
88.77
90.46
89.51
93.83
96.38
95.02
89.73
76.37
D
Mixed
68.57
68.03
77.37
71.24
71.97
73.70
74.94
76.96
81.71
85.81
96.22
82.71
C
Abstract Shapes Two
-shapes
88.95
88.96
90.34
87.69
84.82
88.00
87.38
88.65
89.91
94.95
96.80
89.68
B
Six-shapes
76.87
77.16
87.39
73.29
72.60
73.97
81.34
78.42
79.16
86.46
89.92
79.69
C
Average
84.67
83.13
90.07
83.17
81.99
84.54
85.55
86.77
88.93
91.75
95.19
Reaction time (in ms)
Pictures
1037.48
952.67
881.20 665.55
602.25
563.40 513.95
523.65
471.02
473.79 422.08
646.09
C
Arrows
1121.28
1150.60
1090.42
797.73
725.57
683.07
613.12
651.77
578.04
555.46 465.25
766.57
BE
Dots
Congruent
775.37
684.58
677.37
474.53
412.12
395.05
356.87
341.13
331.46
323.87
271.30
458.51
A
Incongruent
1023.12
905.75
875.02
619.87
546.27
501.63
444.02
451.83
398.09
402.87
321.28
589.98
CD
Mixed
1172.32
1195.47
1177.00 787.10 728.18
725.98
644.72
654.15
597.36
593.85
562.98
803.55
E
Abstract Shapes Two
-shapes
892.80
853.88
795.17
608.15
552.03
520.58
478.38 463.13
436.23
434.56
371.40
582.39
D
Six-shapes
1121.20
1038.10
987.53
726.72
694.15
662.98
640.55
61233 592.23
568.29
532.93 743.38
B
Average
1020.51
968.72
926.24
668.52
608.65
578.96
527.37
528.31 486.35
478.95
421.03
Percentage of anticipatory responses
Pictures
12.17
12.17
6.67
6.83
8.33
4.00
2.17
0.67
1.79
0.77
0.50
5.10
E
Arrows
19.33
17.00
9.00
21.33
23.17
18.67
10.83
9.00
6.96
2.31
0.50
12.56
B
Dots
Congruent
13.83
10.67
2.67
6.33
7.17
6.83
5.50
6.83
6.25
5.38
2.75
6.75
A
Incongruent
21.17
15.33
8.33
11.50
10.33
8.33
8.83
5.50
2.68
3.85
0.25
8.74
A
Mixed
28.67
21.00
15.00
23.00
25.50
26.67
16.17
11.33
5.18
4.42
3.50
16.40
D
Abstract Shapes Two
-shapes
18.00
11.50
7.75
8.42
7.08
6.58
3.67
4.42
2.50
1.35
0.88
6.56
A E
Six-shapes
18.00
17.83
11.58
15.33
15.33
13.83
6.08
5.83
4.73
2.98
2.75
10.39
B C
Average
18.74
15.07
8.71
13.25
13.85
12.13
7.61
6.23
4.30
3.01
1.59
age, the corresponding results are F(1,88)= 6.24 (p< 0.05), <1
(NS), and 11.21 (p< 0.005).
When the stimuli were presented for only 750 ms, 6-year-olds
performed at a level of accuracy roughly comparable to that of
4-5-year-old children shown each stimulus for 2500 ms. While
children of 4 or 5 years could perform well in the single-task
blocks, even the Incongruent one, their average accuracy dipped
below 70% in the Mixed block, even on Congruent trials. At the
fast stimulus presentation rate (750ms), it was not until the age
of II years that children began responding at >80% correct on
average in the Mixed block. Even our oldest children (13 years
old) were not yet correct on 90% of the items in the Mixed block.
6. Results: spatial compatibility effects
6.1. Spatial compatibility effects: Pictures task
The Pictures test contained two intermixed trial types. Con-
gruent and Incongruent, with spatial incompatibility present
on the Incongruent trials. Participants made fewer errors
and responded faster on Congruent than Incongruent trials
(0[313[=10.1 [accuracy], 8.38 [RTI, both p< 0.0001; antici-
patory responses NS; see Fig. 3). These comparisons indicate
that the presence of spatial incompatibility affected perfor-
mance. This effect was present at all ages and particularly
pronounced in the younger children (t(89)=5.35 [accuracy],
4.49 IRT], both p<0.0001; ARs, NS). It was present, though
smaller, in older children and adults 0(223) = 8.55 [accuracy[,
10.41 1RT1, both p <0.0001 ARs, NS) decreasing from the
age of 6 years onward (accuracy: F(1,222)=7.46, p < 0.01;
speed: F(1,222) = 5.23, p<0.02; see Fig. 3). Children of 4-6
years, allowed a long time to respond, showed no change in
the absolute size of the effect over age. However taking into
account their baseline speed on Congruent trials, the percent-
age increase in RT on Incongruent trials decreased signifi-
cantly over these ages (children 4-6 years old: t(89)=4.23,
p <0.0001).
Inhibition was required on only half the trials in the Pictures
task (the Incongruent ones). Although children of 4-5 years were
able to perform correctly on 90% of the Congruent trials, they
were correct on only 80% of the Incongruent trials. Only the
older subjects, and the 6-year-olds given a long time to respond,
were able to perform at ≥85% on Incongruent trials in the Pic-
tures task (88%, 88%, 89%, 94%, and 85%, at ages 10,11 and 13
years, young adult, and 6 years allowed a long time to respond,
respectively). Accuracy at ages 6-9 years, given a short time
to respond, was comparable to that seen at 4-5 years with the
longer response window.
EFTA01098885
M.C. Davidson et al. /Neap rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
Percent Correct
(A)
100
90
80
70
60
1400
1200
11000
.5 800
iE 800
IS 400
cc ▪ 200
j8) 0
%Anticipatory Responses
(C)
40
30
20
10
0
4
es • — •• •
t• - t •
a.
9
4
5
6
6
7
8
F. ▪
--a.
9
10
I
& Congruent
i
incongnani
I Mixed
13
20
• CI
• •
6
StimuS presented for 2500 ms
6
7
8
9
10
11
Anticipatory Responses Errors
8
7
8
9
10
11
•
13
26
13
Stimuli presented for 750 ms
Age In Years
Fig. 2. Dots conditions: (A) accuracy. (B) reaction time and (C) anticipatory response errors.
6.2. Spatial compatibility effects: Arrows task
The Arrows test also presented Congruent and Incongruent
trials randomly intermixed. The youngest participants (4-6 years
of age, tested with the 2500.ms presentation time) were both
more accurate (4891=7.25. p <0.0001) and faster 01891=3.44,
p <0.001) on Congruent than Incongruent trials (showing inter-
ference similar to the Simon effect). Similarly, participants 6
years and older, tested with the 750-ms presentation time, were
also more accurate and faster on Congruent than Incongru•
ent trials (accuracy: 4223] = 8.76, p <0.0001; RT: 42231=7.91,
p <0.0001). Among those ≥6 years, the difference in accuracy
EFTA01098886
2046
MC. Davidson es at. /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
g °
167 0
C • =
E 0
o. c
,c E
2 5
o 2
O go
0
(A)
16
14
12
10
8
4
2
t
140
1) 6.
• 6.
125
.S
80
O
• ai
65
c
(B)
36
25
31.
CAGEy O
•
t 20
t-.
•
Th
1=
2 15
CC o
ern • o 10
o
ix
o 2a
3 cco
€U
2
it
(c)
5
0
4
5
6
6
7
B
9
10
11
f
4
10
I I
6
b
7
6
9
13
26
13
4
5
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
26
I
Staub presented for 2500 ms
Staub presented for 750 ms
Age in Years
Fig. 3. Simon effect on the Pictures task. (A) Difference in percent correct: Congruent minus Incongruent trials. (B)difference in reaction time: Incongruent minus
Congruent trials and (C) percentage change in reaction time: (reaction time on Incongruent minus Congruent trials) divided by reaction time on Congruent trials.
(but not speed) on Congruent versus Incongruent trials decreased
as a function of age (accuracy: F(1,222) = 13.51, p <0.0003).
6.3. Spatial compatibility effects: Dots task
There was a significant spatial incompatibility effect in the
Mixed condition of the Dots task (where Congruent and Incon-
gruent trials were again randomly intermixed). Participants
were significantly faster on Congruent (spatially compatible)
trials than on Incongruent (spatially incompatible) trials:
$223) = 2.09, p < 0.04 (all subjects included); t(217)=2.49,
p <0.01 (subjects ≥6 years old); NS for the youngest children.
This effect of spatial incompatibility on speed did not change
significantly over age. There was no significant effect of spatial
incompatibility for accuracy or anticipatory responses on this
task.
7. Discussion: compatibility effects
Based on our hypothesis that even very young children
can perform well when inhibition alone is taxed, we predicted
they would perform well even on the Incongruent trials of
EFTA01098887
ALC. Davidson a at. /Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2047
the Pictures task, where memory demands were minimized.
Since we hypothesized that inhibitory control shows a long
developmental progression we predicted that the spatial
incompatibility effect would decrease in size with age over an
extended period, despite some findings in the literature to the
contrary. For example, Band, van der Molen, Overtoom, and
Verbaten (2000), using auditory stimuli and including neutral
trials as well as compatible and incompatible ones, found an
inverse relation between the size of the Simon effect and age.
The effect on response speed was smaller in 5-year-olds than
in subjects of 8, I I, and 21 years and the effect on accuracy
was smaller in children of 5 and 8 years than in the two older
groups. They did, however, find that the effect of the stimulus's
irrelevant spatial location persisted longer for the younger
children. On the other hand, consistent with our prediction of a
reduced compatibility effect over age, Gerardi-Coulton (2000)
found evidence that even 2-year-old children show a propensity
to respond on the same side as the stimulus, with the size of the
effect seeming to decrease over the next 6-12 months. Because
of problems with working with children so young, however,
most of the 24-month-olds in that study did not provide useable
data, and the few who did may not have been representative.
The youngest children we tested (4-year-olds) showed evi-
dence of being able to inhibit a dominant response. Certainly
they performed significantly better than chance even on Incon-
gruent trials on the Pictures test where memory demands were
minimized. Despite that, they still performed significantly bet-
ter on Congruent than Incongruent trials. The Simon effect
(faster and more accurate responses on spatially compatible than
incompatible trials) was evident on the Pictures task at all ages.
However, age differences in the Simon effect (the cost of inhibit-
ing the pull to respond on the same side as the stimulus) on the
Pictures task provide evidence that exercising this inhibition was
disproportionately harder for younger children. Consistent with
our prediction, the Simon effect showed a decrease in size from
6 years of age onward and a possible decrease in size between
4 and 6 years of age.
We also looked at spatial incompatibility effects in the context
of higher-order rules and different memory loads in the Arrows
and Dots tests, where the rules were more abstract, no icons were
provided to remind subjects of the stimulus—response mappings,
and where both the identity and the spatial location of the stimu-
lus were relevant to determining the correct response. Although
the rules for the Arrows task were more abstract, the memory
demands were minimal because subjects needed only to look
at the stimulus to see where to respond. On the Dots task, the
abstract rules were arbitrary and memory demands were greater.
On the Dots task, and to a lesser extent on the Arrows test, the
rules had to be instantiated on each trial by mentally integrating
the rule for the appearance of the stimulus with the location of
the stimulus (e.g., "since the dot is striped, I should press on the
opposite side, and since the dot is on the left that means I should
press on the right").
On the Arrows test, the spatial incompatibility effect in both
speed and accuracy was significant throughout our age range and
decreased from age 6 onward in accuracy but not in speed. On
the harder Dots test, the spatial incompatibility effect on RT was
significant throughout, beginning at age 6, but did not change
over age and was not significant for accuracy. The lack of an
accuracy cost on spatially incompatible (Incongruent) trials in
the Mixed block of the Dots task is in sharp contrast to the results
when comparing separate blocks of Congruent and Incongruent
trials on the task (see below where results for the different con-
ditions of the Dots task are presented and discussed).
8. Results: local switch costs
8.1. Local switch costs: Arrows task
The Arrows test contained nonswitch and switch trials,
depending on whether the rule on the present trial was the
same as on the previous trial (nonswitch trials) or different
(switch trials). The difference between performance on non-
switch and switch trials administered in the same block is
known as the "local switch cost." Subjects were faster and more
accurate on nonswitch trials relative to switch trials (all sub-
jects: 43131= 8.54 [%correct] and 8.33 [12'n: subjects <6 years:
489] = 1.36, NS [%correct] and 5.92 [RT]; subjects ≥6 years:
42231= 3.91 [%correct] and 9.80 [RT]; all p <0.0001 except the
one place noted; no differences in AR).
Among subjects 6 years old through young adults, tested
with the briefer 750 ms stimulus presentation time, the accu-
racy cost of switching showed a marked quadratic trend, with the
inverted U-shape peaking for accuracy switch cost at 9-10 years
(F(1,222)=5.65, p < 0.02; see Fig. 4). The youngest children
(4-6 years), given a longer time to respond (2500 ms stimu-
lus presentation time), showed a significantly smaller switch
cost than did the older children of 6-13 years given less time
to respond (F(1,292)=9.39, p <0.003). The youngest children
achieved that small accuracy cost by using their allotted time to
slow down on the harder trials (i.e., the switch trials), and their
RT switch costs were over twice those at any age from 6 years
through young adults (F(1,312) = 16.52, p <0.0001).
8.2. Local switch costs: Dots task
Performance in the Mixed block of the Dots task was sig-
nificantly slower and less accurate on switch than nonswitch
trials. This local switch cost was significant for both accu-
racy and speed (all subjects: t(3131=8.94, p<0.0001 [%cor-
rectl; 8.56, p < 0.0001 [RTI; subjects ≥6 years: 42221=9.27,
p <0.0001 [%correct]; 9.02, p <0.0001 MTh subjects of 4-6
years: t[89] = 2.36, p <0.03 [%correct]; 4.31, p < 0.0001 [RT];
see Fig. 5). The local switch cost was evident on both Congruent
and Incongruent trials in both accuracy and speed (Congruent tri-
als: 43131= 8.22, p < 0.0001 [accuracy]; 6.60, p < 0.0001 [RT];
Incongruent trials: 43131=4.41, p < 0.0001 [accuracy]; 5.76,
p <0.0001 [RT1).
The magnitude of the local switch cost on accuracy in
the Dots-Mixed condition was greatest at 6-13 years of age
and showed little change over that age range. The accuracy
switch cost at 6-13 years was greater than that for adults
(F( I ,222) = 6.33,p < 0.01) and greater than that for the youngest
children (4-6 years old: F(1 ,292) = 9.39,p <0.003). Children of
EFTA01098888
2048
MC Davidson a at /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
25
su
is
5
u
(a)
0
4
300
250
‘1
200
c
s
i= g 150
Z
1C
c 100
0 c
my
O
ss
0
(b)
8
9
10
1.1
13
26
4
5
6
6
7
8
9
Age In Years
10
11
13
26
Fig. 4. Local switch costs on the Arrows task. (a) Local switch costs in Accuracy and (b) local switch costs in reaction time.
4 years and children of 7-8 years performed near chance on
switch trials; the 4-year-olds showed a smaller accuracy switch
cost because they also made many errors on nonswitch trials.
As on the Arrows test, but to a lesser extent, the youngest
children benefited from the long time allotted to them for prepar-
ing their responses and their RT switch costs were larger than
those for older children and adults (F(1,312) = 5.98, p <0.02).
The difference in speed of responding on switch and non-
switch trials tended to be smallest among subjects 6—8 years
of age, presumably because the response window was suffi-
ciently tight for them that they had little room to show differential
RTs.
9. Discussion: local switch costs
As expected, performance was slower and less accurate on
switch than nonswitch trials in both the Arrows task and the
Dots-Mixed condition. For both Arrows and Dots-Mixed, local
switch costs in accuracy were smaller in adults than in children
6-13 years of age tested under the same conditions as adults.
EFTA01098889
M.C. Davidson et al. /Neurops)rhologia 44 (2(X6)2037-207N
2049
Percent Correct
100
80
60
40
20
0
4 5 8
8 7 8 9 10 11
1400
1200
O • 1000
CE
i=
C)
O
600
<4
Ct
800
400
200
0
-.- Rule Repeats (Nonswitch Trials)
- 8-Rule Switches (Switch Trials)
t
13 26
4 5
Age in Years
Fig. 5. Difference between switch and nonswitch trials in the Mixed block of Dots task. (A) Percent correct and (B) reaction time.
Local switch costs on speed of responding, on the other hand,
showed no differences between children of 6-13 years and adults
and remained fairly constant from 6 years through young adult-
hood on both Arrows and Dots-Mixed.
Children of 4-6 years also showed smaller local switch costs
in accuracy than did children of 6-13 years on both the Arrows
task and the Dots-Mixed condition. Presumably children of 4-6
years were able to use the considerable time allowed for them
to respond to slow down on switch trials to preserve their accu-
racy. Their local switch costs in RT were greater than those for
participants at any older age, especially on the Arrows test.
Studies where the switches between tasks are unpredictable
have tended to find larger local switch costs in older ver-
sus younger adults, in contrast to the lack of difference in
global switch costs over age (Kray et al., 2002; van Asselen &
Ridderinkhof, 2000). Studies with predictable switches, on the
other hand, have generally found that local switch costs either
did not change over age or are smaller in older adults, in con-
trast to the larger global RT switch costs found in those studies
(Kray & Lindenberger, 2000; Mayr & Kliegl, 2000a,b; Mayr &
Liebscher, 2001; Salthouse, Firstoe, Lineweaver, & Coon, 1995;
Verhaeghen & Salthouse, 1997; Verhaeghen & De Meersman,
1998). It is not because older adults are performing well that
they show smaller, or equivalent, local switch costs compared
to young adults in predictable-switch studies. It is because their
RT is elevated across the board in the Mixed block (on both
nonswitch and switch trials) that they show no further dispro-
portionate increase in RT on switch trials.
Results comparing children and young adults mirror those
comparing older versus younger adults. The one study that used
predictable switches found that local switch costs remained sta-
ble from age 10 through middle adulthood, though global switch
costs were larger in children (Reimers & Maylor, 2005). All
7 9 9 10 11
13 20
the studies that have used unpredictable switches report greater
local switch costs in children than adults. Cohen et al. (2001)
found greater local switch costs in accuracy, but not in RT, in
children 5-11 years of age compared to adults using Meiran's
task-switching paradigm adapted for children. Crone et al. (in
press), using a paradigm similar to our Dots test, found that local
switch costs decreased with age from 8 to I I to 23 years. Cepeda
et al. (2001), who studied subjects aged 7 through 82 years of
age, asking them the number of the digits displayed or the value
of the digits, report larger local switch costs for both young chil-
dren and older adults than for young adults. Similar results are
reported by Kray et al. (2004).
There are two differences between our results and those of
most studies. First, most studies find little or no difference in
local switch costs in accuracy; the differences they find are
in RT. We found only accuracy differences between children
and adults and no RT differences. Second, we found that local
switch costs in accuracy were greater and local switch costs
in RT were smaller among children in our age range approxi-
mating the ages included in other studies (6-13 years of age)
than in younger children rarely investigated previously in task-
switching studies. Two differences in our design may account
for our relatively large accuracy differences and small RI' dif-
ferences. One is the size of the window provided for subjects
to compute their responses. Children find task-switching harder
than adults. When given a large enough response window so
they can slow down on switch trials, and when that window does
not exceed young children's ability to inhibit responding suffi-
ciently long to compute the correct answer, children show larger
RT switch costs than adults. When given a narrower response
window, or the time needed to compute the answer is longer
than young children are willing to delay their response, children
show larger switch costs in accuracy than adults.
EFTA01098890
2050
MC. Davidson et at /Neumpsychologia 44 (2000 2037-2078
Two, unlike the vast majority of task switching studies, our
stimuli were "univalent." Each stimulus was unique to a task or
rule. No stimulus had one meaning for the Congruent rule and
a different meaning for the Incongruent rule; different stimuli
were used for the different rule sets. Meiran's model predicts,
and Meiran reports results showing, that switch costs largely dis-
appear if the stimuli are relevant to only one task (i.e., univalent;
Meiran, 2000a.b). We clearly found robust switch costs with our
univalent stimuli, but some differences in what we found versus
what others have reported might be due to this characteristic of
our stimuli.
10. Results: comparisons across the different conditions
of the Dots task (Congruent Single-Task Block,
Incongruent Single-Task Block, and the Mixed block)
Comparisons of performance among these three blocks show
significant differences in the percentage of correct responses,
RTs, and number of anticipatory responses (F(2,939) = 278.03
[%correctl, 134.55 [RT], 49.86 [AR], all p <0.0001). As can
be seen in Fig. 2, performance was best in the Congruent condi-
tion, intermediate in the Incongruent one, and worst in the Mixed
condition. Planned comparisons show that performance in each
of the conditions was significantly different from performance
in the other two conditions in accuracy, speed, and anticipatory
responses (with the single exception of percentage of anticipa-
tory responses in the Congruent and Incongruent blocks among
subjects >6 years; see Table 3). Although performance was bet-
ter for Dots-Congruent than Dots-Incongruent, that difference
pales in comparison with the difference between performance in
either of those conditions and Dots-Mixed (difference between
Mixed and Incongruent versus the difference between Incongru-
Table 3
T values for planned comparisons between trial blocks within the Dots test
Percentage of
correct responses
Response
speed
Anticipatory
responses
All subjects (d.f.= 313)
Congruent vs.
13.78
14.46
7.46
Incongruent blocks
Congruent vs. Mixed
28.55
blocks
24.49
14.58
Incongruent vs. Mixed
18.81
blocks
15.66
10.51
Younger subjects (4-6 years old: cll.89)
Congruent vs.
7.1
7.12
4.49
Incongruent blocks
Congruent vs. Mixed
15.32
blocks
10.51
8.27
Incongruent vs. Mixed
8.83
blocks
5.99
4.82
Older subjects (6-26 years old: d.f.=223)
Congruent vs.
12.24
17.06
6.24
Incongruent blocks
Congruent vs. Mixed
24.15
blocks
30.36
12.1
Incongruent vs. Mixed
16.91
blocks
18.74
9.43
All significant at p <0.000!.
ent and Congruent: 4313] = 18.51 [accuracy], 18.06 [RT], and
5.45 [AR], all p <0.0001; see Fig. 2).
Performance in the Incongruent and Mixed conditions can
also be viewed as a percentage change from performance in the
Congruent condition ((I or M minus C] divided by C), thus tak-
ing into account baseline performance. The percentage change
was far greater for performance in the Mixed condition than
the Incongruent one (see Fig. 6). The difference between accu-
racy in the Congruent and Incongruent conditions decreased
significantly over age (F(1,312) = 14.95, p < 0.0001), but the
decrease over age in the difference between how accurately par-
ticipants performed the Congruent and Mixed conditions was far
greater (F(1,312) =43.81,p <0.0001; see Fig. 6). Thus, the accu-
racy difference between the Mixed and Congruent conditions
decreased more sharply over age than did the accuracy differ-
ence between the Incongruent and Congruent conditions (dif-
ference between accuracy difference scores: (F(1,312) = 12.02,
p <0.001)). Despite the marked improvement over age in accu-
racy in the Mixed condition, even for 13-year-olds the difference
in accuracy in the Mixed condition versus the Congruent one was
larger than for adults (F(1,88)=7.47, p < 0.01).
For neither the Incongruent nor Mixed conditions was there
a significant linear trend for reduced percentage-change scores
in any dependent measure between the ages of 4-6 years,
except for percentage-change in RT for the Mixed condition
(F(1,312)=4.95, p <0.04). The percentage change in speed of
responding in the Incongruent condition compared with the
Congruent one remained quite stable over age. The percentage
change in RT in the Mixed condition compared with the Congru-
ent condition was greater and increased significantly over age
(F(1,312) = 28.75, p <0.0001). Thus, with age participants were
better able to modulate their performance speed, slowing down
in the more difficult Mixed condition to minimize any reduc-
tion in accuracy; whereas younger subjects (even those given a
very long response window) tended to keep their response speed
more constant across conditions at the cost of accuracy in the
more difficult Mixed condition.
The difference in response speed between the Mixed and Con-
gruent conditions increased over age while the RT difference
between the Incongruent and Congruent conditions remained
constant. Hence the difference between RT in the Mixed and
Congruent conditions showed a greater change over age than the
difference between the Incongruent and Congruent conditions
(difference between RT difference scores: F(1,312) = 42.09,
p <0.0001).
We had predicted that cognitive flexibility would improve
with age and that therefore the difference in performance
between Dots-Incongruent and Dots-Mixed would decrease over
age. That was strongly confirmed for subjects 6 years and
older tested with the 750 ms stimulus presentation time. The
difference between their performance on the Incongruent and
Mixed conditions steadily decreased in both speed and accuracy
(F( I ,222) = 12.9, p < 0.0005 [%correct]; 3.72, p < 0.05 [RT]).
For children 4-6 years of age however, tested with the 2500 ms
stimulus presentation time, the difference between performance
in the Incongruent and Mixed conditions did not change consis-
tently over age in either speed or accuracy.
EFTA01098891
M.C. Davidson a al. /Neap rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2051
-60
-50
.40
rA
=
-30
C)
ca
Z -20
U
a. -10
o
—
Incongruent
—ID-- M xeil
-
a
9
10
II
13
(Al
4
5
te 120
0
E
100
R 80
0
1.1
GI
60
CC C
•_
h
40
£
.C
C0
0 20
•
(B)
-
S
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
Age in Years
13
26
Fig. 6. The Incongruent and Mixed conditions as percentage change from the Congruent condition of the Dots task. (A) Percentage change in accuracy and (B)
percentage change in reaction time.
11. Discussion: comparisons across the different
conditions of the Dots task
We had predicted that inhibitory demands would account for
a greater proportion of the variance in children's performance
than in adults, and the more so the younger the child. The Con-
gruent and Incongruent blocks of the Dots test each contained
the same memory load (one higher-order rule, with two embed-
ded rules). The two blocks differed only in that the Incongruent
block required inhibition while the Congruent Block did not.
The prepotent tendency to respond on the same side as the stim-
ulus had to be inhibited in the Incongruent block but should have
facilitated performance in the Congruent Block. We predicted
that the Dots-Incongruent block would be more difficult than
Dots-Congruent Block, but more important, that the difference
in performance between those two conditions would decrease
over age as inhibitory control improved.
That prediction was confirmed. Dots-Incongruent was more
difficult than Dots-Congruent, and the more so the younger the
children. Accuracy and impulsivity differences between these
two conditions decreased over age. (The larger spatial incom-
patibility effect we had found the younger the children [with
memory demands minimized] is also consistent with this predic-
tion). Indeed, accuracy differences between these two conditions
must continue to decrease after 13 years of age since the differ-
ence in accuracy in Dots-Congruent and Dots-Incongruent was
still greater in 13-year-olds than in young adults.
Since it is harder to switch back and forth between inhibiting a
dominant response and making it, we predicted that performance
at all ages would be better in the Incongruent-only block of the
Dots test (where the tendency to respond on the same side as
the stimulus must be inhibited all the time) than in the Mixed
block of the task (where that tendency must be inhibited on
only half the trials as the other half are Congruent trials), and
that this difference would be greater the younger the children.
Indeed, performance differences between the Dots-Incongruent
and Dots-Mixed conditions were large at all ages, and especially
large the younger the children. as predicted.
12. Results: global switch costs
The cost of knowing that on some trials you will have to
switch rules can be evaluated by comparing (a) performance
on Congruent trials following Congruent trials within a block
EFTA01098892
2052
N.C. Davidson a al. /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
50
45
40
15
mas t '
10
c
O — C
tft -c E
O1-
(A)
5
0
90
0
.12E°
tm
is;
gga0▪ 70
c 2 2 o
gt it' 03
E
x 60
o 0
E 2 0 r,
tal—
tz fr.
c
g
50
00
etEF
cexw
40
2 2
c
-- co
c
c
s:"
t&
•
.tt 6
O 22c
20
—8s
io
(8)
El Congruent Trials: Nortswitch in Mixed BMA
minus Single-Task Block
Inconenseol
Nonsaith in Mixed Block
minus Single-Task Bloat
i
4
5
6
9
in
13
28
7
6
8
9
Age In Years
10
11
3
26
Fig. 7. Mixing costs on the Dots task: performance on trials in the single-task blocks compared with performance on comparable nonswitch trials in the Mixed-task
block. (A) Difference in percentage of correct responses: trials in the Congruent and Incongruent blocks minus the corresponding nonswitch trials in the Mixed block
and (B) difference in reaction time: nonswitch Congruent or Incongruent trials in the Mixed block minus corresponding trials in the single-task blocks.
of only Congruent trials to (b) performance on Congruent trials
following Congruent trials within the Mixed block, and similarly
by comparing Incongruent trials in the Incongruent block with
Incongruent nonswitch trials in the Mixed block. In both cases
on all dependent measures the difference is clear. Although the
local context of all these trials is similar (all follow a trial of the
same type), when these occurred in the context of a Mixed block,
participants were significantly slower, less accurate, and more
inclined to make anticipatory responses (see Fig. 7; nonswitch
Congruent Dots-Mixed trials versus Dots-Congruent single-task
block [43 I 3) = 13.48, p <0.0001 (accuracy); 18.21, p <0.0001
(RI); 2.85, p <0.011; nonswitch Incongruent Dots-Mixed tri-
als versus Dots-Incongruent single-task block [1(313)=9.44,
p< 0.0001 (accuracy); 10.07, p< 0.0001 (RI); 3.74, p <0.0003
(ARM).
The accuracy cost of this difference in global (i.e., trial-
block) context was roughly equal for Congruent and Incongru-
ent trials especially among the younger subjects. From age 9
onwards there was a trend for the accuracy cost to be greater
for Congruent trials (see Fig. 7). The cost in speed of this
difference in global context was significantly greater for Congru-
ent than Incongruent trials (only nonswitch trials: all subjects:
4313] = 4A6,p <0.0001; subjects s6 years, 3000-ms trial dura-
tion: 4891=2.73, p <0.01; subjects ≥6 years, 1250-ms trial
duration: 1[223]=4.18, p <0.0001; see Fig. 7). The difference
in this RT cost for Congruent versus Incongruent trials was
greater for the children 4-6 years old than for the older sub-
jects (F(1,312)=6.28, p < 0.01).
The mixing cost (the cost of Congruent [Incongruent]
trials being Mixed in with Incongruent [Congruent] ones) for
EFTA01098893
M.C. Davidson a al. /Neuromrhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2053
accuracy was much greater for subjects under 10 years of age
than for those 10 years and older (reduction of the cost in
accuracy over age [all subjects]: F(1,312)=30.6, p <0.0001;
see Fig. 7). The mixing cost as assessed by response speed,
however, increased over age (F(1,312) = 60.10, p <0.0001; see
Fig. 7), again showing that older subjects were better able (or
more likely) to modulate their speed to preserve their accuracy.
These findings are true for Congruent and for Incongruent trials.
13. Discussion: global switch costs
Global switch costs (worse performance on nonswitch tri-
als in a Mixed block versus in a single-task block) were found
here, as predicted. We had predicted they would be greater the
younger the children. Indeed, global switch costs on accuracy
were greater for participants <10 years old than for those older
than 10 years. Global switch costs on accuracy declined from
9 to 13 years. However, global switch costs on RT showed the
opposite pattern. They increased from age 6 to early adulthood.
Adults adjusted their speed to preserve their accuracy; younger
children did that less, resulting in a difference in the speed-
accuracy trade-off with age.
We had also predicted that, because of floor effects for Incon-
gruent trials, the effect of context (the Mixed block versus
single-task block) would be greater on Congruent than Incon-
gruent trials, and that this would be more evident the younger
the child. However, contrary to the portion of our prediction con-
cerning development, the size of the greater effect of context on
Congruent versus Incongruent trials did not change over age.
It may well be that difficulty undoing inhibition of the pre-
potent response accounts for why switching back to making a
response consistent with that tendency shows a greater cost than
switching back to inhibiting that tendency, as Allport and others
have suggested (Allport et al., 1994; Allport & Wylie, 2000).
However, it is also true that the easier condition provides more
room to find an effect because performance is so good on that
condition on nonswitch trials. It is not that subjects are worse at
switching to the easier rule than to the harder rule. It is that the
floor is so much lower for the easier than the harder condition
on nonswitch trials that there is more room for an effect to be
found for switching to the easier condition.
As noted above in the discussion of spatial incompatibility
effects, the lack of an accuracy difference on spatially compati-
ble (Congruent) and spatially incompatible (Incongruent) trials
in the Mixed block is in sharp contrast to the result of com-
paring separate blocks of Congruent and Incongruent trials on
the task. The latter shows a significant incompatibility effect for
children of all ages in both speed and accuracy, though not for
adults. The cost in accuracy on the spatially incompatible block
compared to the compatible block of the Dots task was greater
than the cost in speed, and the accuracy cost decreased over
age from 8 years onward (see Fig. 6). Our results for adults are
consistent with a wealth of studies where adults have shown no
cost (or greatly reduced cost) of inhibiting in steady-state the
urge to make the spatially incompatible response in single-task
blocks (Praamstra, Kleine, & Schnitzler, 1999; Ridderinkhof,
2002; Sturmer, Leuthold, Soetens, Schroter, & Sommer. 2002;
Hackley, & de Labra, 2002; Verbruggen,
Liefooghe, Notebaert, & Vandierendonck, 2005; Wiihr, 2004,
2005).
14. Results: interaction of local switch costs with
prepotent response or its inhibition
14.1. Arrows test: interaction of rule switching with
prepotent response or its inhibition
For younger children, there was barely any accuracy switch
cost in the Arrows test. Their accuracy was much worse on
Incongruent trials whether or not they were switch trials. For
7—I0-year-olds, the cost to accuracy of switching was greater
on Congruent trials (111191=6.41, p < 0.0001). The difference
in the accuracy cost of switching to Congruent versus Incongru-
ent trials followed an inverted U-shaped function over age (see
Fig. 8). It was negative at 6 and 11-13 years of age, showing a
greater accuracy cost in switching to the Incongruent rule. It was
largest at 8 years of age and intermediate at 7 and 9-10 years
of age. For adults, there was no effect of spatial incompatibility
on accuracy. Adults made more errors on switch than nonswitch
trials in the Arrows test and it made no difference whether a
Congruent or Incongruent response was required.
The effect of switching on RT in the Arrows test, depending
on whether the rule on the switch trial was Congruent or Incon-
gruent, showed a different pattern. Switching took a greater toll
on the speed with which the younger children responded when
the response rule on the switch trial was Incongruent rather than
Congruent (difference for children 4-6 years old: [RT on Incon-
gruent switch minus nonswitch trials] versus [RT on Incongruent
switch minus nonswitch trials' (489] = 2.6,p < 0.03) with a sim-
ilar difference for children 6-7 years old: (4591= 2.8, p< 0.01).
For children 8-13 years of age, the RT cost of switching was
equivalent on Congruent and Incongruent trials. For young
adults, the difference seen in the youngest children reversed
and the RT cost of switching was greater on Congruent trials
(1[191=2.75, p <0.01), consistent with reports in the literature
for adults (e.g., Allport et al., 1994; Allport & Wylie, 2000).
The progression over age was from an opposite pattern in the
youngest children to no difference in the older children to finally
seeing a greater RT switch cost on Congruent than on Incongru-
ent trials for young adults.
14.2. Dots test: interaction of vile switching with prepotent
response or its inhibition
The difference between accuracy on switch and nonswitch
trials in the Mixed block of the Dots task was significantly
greater for Congruent than for Incongruent trials [all sub-
jects: 4313) = 2.96, p < 0.003; children <6 years: 489) = 2.36,
p <0.02; children >6 years: 1(223)=3.03, p <0.0041. The
greater cost in accuracy of switching to the Congruent condi-
tion was evident at 7 through II years of age (see Fig. 8b). The
children for whom the Dots task was most difficult (those 4-5
years old even though given a large response window and those
6 years old given a shorter response window) showed no greater
EFTA01098894
2054
MC Davidson a at /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
25
20
15
10
5
0
•10
— -15
co
re
o
-20
-25
(a)
Age in Years
(b)
4
5
6
4
7
9
10
11
13
26
Fig. 8. Differential accuracy cost of switching to the Congruent rule rather than the Incongruent rule. (a) Arrows test and (b) Dots-Mixed condition.
accuracy switch cost for Congruent or Incongruent trials, nor did
those who found the task easiest, 13-year-olds and young adults.
Beginning at 8 years of age there was also a greater switch
cost in RT for Congruent than Incongruent trials, replicating
the pattern previously reported for adults (that the RT cost of
switching to the rule consistent with one's prepotent inclination
is greater than the cost of switching to the rule that requires
resisting that inclination [e.g., Allport & Wylie, 2000; Allport
et al., 1994]). The difference in speed of responding comparing
Congruent switch and nonswitch trials was greater than the
difference in speed of responding comparing Incongruent
switch and nonswitch trials for children ≥8 years and for adults
(children 8-13 years old: 11143] = 2.18, p <0.001; young adults:
t[19]=2.75, p <0.01) but not for children <8 years. Indeed,
for the youngest children (4-6 years of age) the opposite was
found: The RT cost of switching to an Incongruent trial was
greater for them than the RT cost of switching to a Congruent
trial (4891=4.31, p <0.0001); minoring a similar finding on the
Arrows task. For 6-year-olds performing the faster version of
the task, the RT cost of switching was equivalent on Congruent
EFTA01098895
M.C. Davidson a al. /Neuromrhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2055
and Incongruent trials. Hence, the age progression was from a
greater RT switch cost for Incongruent trials (at 4-6 years), to
no difference, to a greater RI' switch cost for Congruent trials
(from 8 years onward; see Fig. 8).
15. Discussion: interaction of local switch costs with
prepotent response or its inhibition
"Asymmetric switch costs" refer to a greater relative cost in
switching to the rule consistent with your prepotent tendency
(Congruent trials in our study) than in switching to the rule that
requires inhibiting that tendency (Allport & Wylie, 2000; Allport
et al., 1994; De Jong, 1995; Kleinsorge & Heuer, 1999; Los,
1996; Stoffels, 19%; Wylie & Allport, 2000). One explanation
for this pattern is that greater inhibition is required of the easier
rule when responding according to the harder rule than vice
versa, and that going back to responding according to easier rule
requires undoing that inhibition. Hence, for example, Allport and
Wylie (2000) looked at switching between reading color words
and saying the color of the ink in the Stroop task. To report the
ink color requires inhibiting the tendency to read the word; to
switch back to reading the word presumably requires undoing
that inhibition. To read the word requires minimal inhibition
of reporting the ink color; hence there is minimal inhibition to
undo when switching back to reporting the ink color (but see
also Yeung & Monett, 2003).
In the present experiment, to respond on the side opposite
the stimulus should require inhibiting the tendency to respond
on the same side as the stimulus. Switching back to respond-
ing on the same side as the stimulus should require undo-
ing that inhibition. We had predicted we would replicate the
effect previously reported in adults (greater RT costs for switch-
ing to the rule consistent with subjects' inclinations than for
switching to the rule requiring inhibition of that) but also pre-
dicted that the very youngest children, who have poor inhibitory
control, would perform poorly on all trials requiring inhibi-
tion (Incongruent trials and switch trials) and that the effects
would be additive. Thus, we predicted that the youngest chil-
dren, unlike adults, would perform worse when switching to the
Incongruent rule rather than to the Congruent one. Further, we
predicted that intermediate-age children, who are beginning to
exercise better inhibitory control, would require greater effort
to do so than older participants. Hence, we predicted that undo-
ing that inhibition (switching back to making the Congruent
response) should exact a greater cost in intermediate-age chil-
dren than in older participants. Thus, we predicted that beginning
after 6 or 7 years, "asymmetric switch costs" would be larger
in younger versus older participants. These predictions were
confirmed.
In both the Arrows test and the Dots-Mixed condition, adults
showed a greater RT cost (though no accuracy difference) for
switching to the Congruent than the Incongruent rule. Those
results replicate those of Allport and Wylie. However, a different
pattern was found in children. On the Arrows test, the youngest
children were slower to switch to the Incongruent rule than
the Congruent one. Similarly in the Dots-Mixed condition, for
the youngest children (4-6 years old) the KT cost of switching
to the Incongruent rule was greater than the RT cost of switching
to the Congruent one. For older children of 8-13 years on
the Arrows test, the RT cost of switching was equivalent on
Congruent and Incongruent trials. Only for young adults did the
difference seen in the youngest children reverse. The progres-
sion over age on the Arrows test was from a greater KT switch
cost on Incongruent than Congruent trials for the younger chil-
dren (4-7 years old) to no difference in the older children (8-13
years old) to finally seeing a greater RT switch cost on Congru-
ent trials for young adults. On the Dots test, beginning at 8 years
of age and for older ages, the adult pattern was evident—greater
RT switch costs on Congruent than Incongruent trials.
The pattern we report in children also differs from previ-
ous reports for adults (and our own findings for adults) in that
children showed differences in the size of the switch costs on
accuracy as well as RT On the Arrows test, the youngest chil-
dren made more errors on Incongruent trials, whether they were
switch trials or not, and showed little difference in accuracy
on switching to Congruent or Incongruent trials. Children 7-10
years of age, however, showed greater costs in accuracy when
switching to Congruent than to Incongruent trials. The greater
accuracy cost in switching to the Congruent versus Incongruent
rule was largest in magnitude at 8 years and next largest at 7
and 9-10 years of age. For children 11-13 years of age, the cost
in accuracy of switching was slightly greater on Incongruent
than Congruent trials. For adults there was no difference in the
accuracy cost.
In the Dots-Mixed condition, the difference between accu-
racy on switch and nonswitch trials was greater for Congruent
than for Incongruent trials overall and at all individual ages
except 4 and 5 years of age, age 6 when the shorter presen-
tation time was used, and of course young adults. The chil-
dren for whom the task was most difficult (those 4-5 years
old even though given a large response window and those 6
years old given a shorter response window) showed no greater
accuracy switch cost for Congruent or Incongruent trials. The
size of their accuracy cost for switching to the Incongruent rule
was limited by their relatively poor performance on even non-
switch Incongruent trials. At all other ages, children showed
a greater accuracy cost when switching to the Congruent rule
in the Dots task. This was largest at the intermediate ages of
7-11 years.
The only other study to examine this in children (Crone et
al., in press), using a task similar to our Dots task, found greater
costs in both speed and accuracy for switching to Congruent
versus Incongruent trials, as did we. However, unlike us, they
did not find differences in this over age.
It may be that the difficulty of undoing inhibition of the pre-
potent response accounts for why switching back to making a
response consistent with that tendency shows a greater cost than
switching back to inhibiting that tendency, as Allport and oth-
ers have suggested. However, it should be noted that the easier
condition also provides more room to find an effect because per-
formance is so good on that condition on nonswitch trials. The
floor is so much lower for the easier than the harder condition
on nonswitch trials that there is more room for an effect to be
found for switching to the easier condition.
EFTA01098896
2056
M.C. Davidson err at. /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
16. Results: interaction of local switch costs with
response-site switching
16.1. Arrows test: interaction of rule switching with
response-site switching
The correct response on Trial N might be in the same location
as on Trial N-1 or it might be at the opposite location. We had
hypothesized that when the rule switched there would be an
inclination to change where to respond as well, and that when the
rule remained the same, subjects would be faster when the same
trial repeated (consistent with global commands to "change"
or "repeat"). We thus predicted an interaction between whether
the rule changed and whether the correct response-site changed.
On the Arrows test, our prediction was strongly confirmed for
accuracy (F(1,312)=41.89, p < 0.0001). The effect was most
marked at 6-9 years of age and smallest in adults (see Fig. 9A).
4
.
;
(O
8 • ou,aO
C
,
c :2
ci)
E
20
0 a
(A)
Difference in RT (in msec):
(B)
200
co
ct) 150
WO
O
ago
_
a O
-100
Indeed, children of 6-9 years of age performed at or near chance
on rule-switching response-stay trials.
In
speed
of
responding
the
interaction
of
rule
switch x response change on the Arrows test began to be
evident at 9 years of age and was significant for adults and
children of 9-13 years (RT: 11126)=3.55, p <0.0005). Among
children younger than 9 years, however, there was a tendency
for the effects of a rule switch and of a response-site change
to be additive. Children younger than 9 years were slower
on rule-switch trials, whether or not the correct response-site
changed (main effect of a rule switch: t(I63)= 6.8 I, p < 0.0001).
Similarly, they tended to be slower on response-change trials.
whether or not the rule switched. They were slowest if both
rule and response changed (F(1,178)=4.42, p < 0.0001: see
Fig. 9B). The adult pattern (of faster responses when neither
changed or both changed) was not seen until 9 years of age on
the Arrows test.
6
7
8
9
Age In Years
—
Rule Repeals
•••••-• Rule Swotches
26
Fig. 9. Cost of switching response locations in the Arrows task on switch trials and on nonswitch trials. (A) Difference in percent correct: opposite side minus same
side and (B) difference in reaction time: opposite side minus same side.
EFTA01098897
M.C. Davidson es a1. /Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2057
The effect on switch trials is of most interest here because
nonswitch, response-stay trials are simply repeat trials. Focusing
just on switch trials, the difference in error rates on response-stay
and response-shift trials was smallest for the youngest children
(4-6 years of age) and young adults (see Fig. 9A). Although
this difference decreased from 9 to 13 years, the difference
in accuracy at 13 years was still greater than seen in young
adults (F(1,42)=4.1, p <0.05). At all ages, this difference was
for fewer errors to be made when both rule and response-site
changed than when just the rule changed. This accuracy differ-
ence was most pronounced from 6 to 13 years.
The difference in response time on switch trials depending
on whether the response-site changed or not decreased from 4
to 6 years when given lots of time to respond, and was insignif-
icant among children of 6, 8, and 10 years and young adults
(see Fig. 9B). Not until 9 years of age were children faster when
40
30
t;
Ci
g a 10
o
0.
• g
0
C
• E
•
-10
c
co y
E •20
.30
(A)
.40
250
o N 200
E g
C e3 150
ta
C 100
S
0
:g
0
5 0.
O -°
50
•100
-150
both rule and response-site switched (41331 = 3.58,p <0.0005).
Children of 4-8 years tended to be faster when the response-
site remained the same, even on switch trials (1(163)=1.77,
p =0.08).
16.2. Dots test: interaction of title switching with
response-site switching
When both the rule and response-site remained the same, pre-
cisely the same trial was repeated. One would expect RT to be
fast then, and faster than when the response location changed.
What is more interesting is that, as predicted, performance on
switch trials was faster and more accurate when the correct
response location also switched than when it remained the same
0(308) = 8.03, p <0.0001 [accuracy]; 2.8, p < 0.005 [R11; see
Fig. 10). The corresponding results for only the younger subjects
Rule Repeats
Rule Switches
I
0
5
8
8
7
8
9
10
11
13
(B)
Age In Years
Fig. 10. Cost of switching response locations in the Dots task on switch trials and nonswitch trials. (A) Difference in percent correct: opposite side minus same side.
(Across the age spectrum, and especially at 6-11 years. participants were correct on more switch trials when the response-site also switched from the previous trial.)
and (B) difference in reaction time: opposite side minus same side. (The typical adult pattern of faster responding on switch trials if the response-site also switched
from the previous trial, seen here and reported in numerous studies, was not evident until 13 years of age.)
EFTA01098898
2058
MC Davidson a at /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
are: (t[89[=4.25, p <0.0001 (accuracy); NS (RI). The corre-
sponding results for just the older subjects are: (1[2231=8.25.
p <0.0001 [accuracy'. 4.05, p <0.0001 [RTI). Indeed, from age
6 to II (and especially 9-11 years) the effect on accuracy was
particularly large (see Fig. 10A). The adult pattern (of faster
responses when neither changed or both changed) was not seen
until 13 years of age on the Dots (see Fig. 10B); 4 years later
than that pattern appears on the Arrows test.
On switch trials, there was little difference in children's error
rates on response-stay and response-shift trials from 4 to 7 years
of age. From 8 to 10 years accuracy was far better on switch
trials when the response-site also changed. The difference in
accuracy was again small among young adults (see Fig. 10A).
The difference in response time on switch trials depending on
whether the response-site switched or not decreased from 4 to
6 years when given lots of time to respond (as it did for Arrows
[compare Figs. 9B and 10B1), was large again from 6 to 8 years
when given less time to respond, but not until 13 years was
response time faster when both the rule and the response-site
switched. Before then RTs were faster on switch trials when the
response-site did not change (see Fig. 10B).
17. Discussion: interaction between rule switching and
response-site switching
When the rule and response remained the same, precisely the
same trial was repeated. One would expect RTs to be faster on
such exact trial repetitions than on other trials. More interesting
is what happens on switch trials. We predicted, consistent with
the findings of others (Hommel et al., 2001; Kleinsorge, 1999;
Meiran, 2000a,b; Rogers & Monsell, 1995; Schuch & Koch.
2004) and Diamond's all-or-none hypothesis (Diamond, 2005),
that performance would be better when both the rule and the
response changed than when the rule changed but the response
did not.
On both Arrows and Dots-Mixed, across the age spectrum,
people were more accurate when both the rule and the response
changed than when just the rule switched. At all ages, fewer
errors were made on the Arrows test when both the rule and
response-site changed than when just the rule changed, with
the difference in error rate being smallest for young adults and
largest for children 6-9 years of age. The difference in accuracy
at 13 years was still greater than that seen in young adults. For
Dots-Mixed as well, fewer errors were made when both the rule
and response-site changed than when just the rule changed, with
the difference in error rate being smallest for young adults and
the youngest children and largest for children 8-10 years of age.
Thus, we found the predicted all-or-none pattern for accuracy
throughout our age spectrum.
For speed of responding, we replicated the pattern previ-
ously reported for adults: faster responses when both the rule
and response switched than when only the rule switched but not
the response. In children, the RT interaction of rule-switch with
response-switch was not evident until the age of 9 on the Arrows
task and the age of 13 on the more difficult Dots-Mixed condi-
tion. On the Arrows test, children younger than 9 years of age
showed a tendency for the effects of a rule switch and response
switch to be additive. Children of 4-8 years were slowest if both
the rule and correct response-site changed. They were faster
when the response-site remained the same, even on switch tri-
als. Similarly, in the Dots-Mixed condition, children of 4 and 5
years given a long time to respond, and children of 6-8 years
given less time to respond, were faster when the response-site
remained the same whether the rule changed or not. Especially
at 4 years, and at 6 years on the short-version, the RT effect
of task-switching and response-switching appeared to be addi-
tive. Thus, for RT we found the predicted all-or-none pattern
in older children and young adults, but for younger children
we found worse RT performance on switch than nonswitch tri-
als and on response-switch than response-stay trials and those
effects tended to be additive.
18. Results: comparing across the tests that required
inhibition (Pictures, Arrows, and Dots)
18.1. Comparing performance in the Mixed block of each
of the tests
The Pictures test (our classic Simon task with minimized
memory load) was substantially easier for children of all ages
than were the Arrows or Dots-Mixed tests (spatial incompati-
bility tasks with higher level rules). Children showed far better
accuracy, faster response times, and markedly fewer instances of
anticipatory reaching in the Pictures test compared with either
the Arrows or Dots tests (see Fig. II; Pictures versus Arrows:
t[293[= 13.3 [%correct], 9.42 [RTI, 9.06 [AR': Pictures versus
Dots-Mixed: t[293[= 18.53 [%correct], 8.59 [RT], 12.92 [AR];
all six t-values significant at p <0.0001). By 9 years of age,
anticipatory responses had all but disappeared on the Pictures
test.
Children tested in the faster presentation condition (children
≥6 years of age) found the Arrows test to be almost as diffi-
cult as the Dots-Mixed condition, judging by their comparable
speed in the two conditions (see Fig. II), though other aspects
of their performance were still significantly worse on Dots-
Mixed than on Arrows (children 6-13 years of age: t[203] =4.05,
p<0.001 [accuracy]; NS [RT]; 2.72, p<0.01 [AR]). Without
question however, the difference in performance of children
6-13 years on the Pictures test compared with performance
on either the Arrows test or Dots-Mixed condition was far
greater than any difference in their performance on the Arrows
test and the Dots-Mixed condition (Pictures minus Arrows ver-
sus Dots-Mixed minus Arrows: t[2931= 15.15 [96correct], 8.92
[RTI, 11.17 [AR], all significant at p <0.0001).
For adults and the youngest children, the results were dif-
ferent. Adults found the Pictures and Arrows tests to be of
comparable ease and found both of those conditions to be sig-
nificantly easier than the Dots-Mixed condition (see Fig. 11;
Dots-Mixed versus Pictures: r(20) = 7.47 [KT]; Dots-Mixed ver-
sus Arrows: S20) = 7.21 [K1], both p <0.0001; no comparisons
between Pictures and Arrows yielded any significant results).
Thus, while performance on Arrows and Dots was roughly com-
parable for children of 6-13 years, performance on Arrows and
Pictures was comparable for adults.
EFTA01098899
M.C. Davidson er at /Neueopsyrhologia 44 (200612037-2078
2059
Percent Correct
(A)
4
5
0
0
7
8
9
10
11
13
1200•
0
re MO.
to
•
8O
0
•
600.
03
IX
•
400 •
% Anticipatory Responses
S
0
7
8
9
10
11
4
5
6
%mutt gaunter) for 2500 ms
(C)
•••• Piclam,
- ♦ Anon
—II Dole
28
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
26
13
26
SEIM. crosemed log 750 ms
Age in Years
Fig. II. Comparison or Mixed conditions of Dots. Arrows and Pictures. (A) Percent correct. (B) reaction time and (C) percentage of anticipatory responses.
EFTA01098900
2060
MC. Davidson a al /Neummrhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
While children of 4-6 years. tested with the longer stimulus
presentation times, found the Pictures test to be easier than the
Arrows test or Dots-Mixed condition as did older children, chil-
dren of 4-6 years (unlike older children) found the Arrows test
to be much easier than the Dots-Mixed condition (see Fig. II).
All pair-wise comparisons between any two of the three tests
were significant except for Arrows versus Dots-Mixed on RT,
and all those were significant at p <0.0001, except for Pictures
versus Arrows on AR [459)=
p < 0.01] and Arrows ver-
sus Dots-Mixed on AR [t(59)=
p <0.0051. Thus, for the
youngest children no two tests were comparable in difficulty. The
Dots-Mixed condition was significantly harder than the Arrows
test and the latter was significantly harder than the Pictures
test (except that in their RT data they showed the same pat-
tern as older children [comparable performance on the Arrows
and Dots-Mixed tests with much faster responses in the Pictures
test]).
./8.2. Comparing performance across conditions that
differed in their demands on inhibition but required little or
no memory
Comparing performance in the Pictures test and the Dots-
Congruent condition enabled us to compare performance in the
presence versus absence of an inhibitory demand with mem-
ory load held relatively constant. Both the Pictures test and
the Dots-Congruent condition required holding two rules in
mind. (In the Pictures test that memory demand could be min-
imized by referring to the visible icons that showed which
picture was mapped to the left or right. In the Dots-Congruent
condition, the memory demand could be minimized by remem-
bering the single higher-order rule.) While the memory demand
was roughly equivalent in Pictures and Dots-Congruent, the
former required inhibiting the tendency to make the spatially
compatible response on half the trials whereas the spatially
compatible response was always the correct response in the
Dots-Congruent condition (no inhibition required). Thus more
inhibitory control was required in the Pictures test than in
the Dots-Congruent condition. Across all ages, performance
was consistently better in the Dots-Congruent condition than
in the Pictures test on all dependent measures (all subjects:
43B] = 23.16 [96 correct] and 24.0 [RT]; 2.31; subjects >6
years: t[2231=13.9 [%correcti and 27.82 [RT1; subjects ≤6
years: t[89] =4.16 [%correct] and 10.26 [RT1; all p < 0.0001;
see Table 2). The difference in accuracy on Dots-Congruent
versus Pictures decreased over the age range of 6-26 years
(F(I,222) = 5.32, p <0.02).
Another way to assess inhibitory costs, and change in their
size overage, is to look at the cost of steady-state inhibition (con-
sistently inhibiting the prepotent response in Dots-Incongruent)
versus consistently making the prepotent response in Dots-
Congruent. These results were presented above (see Fig. 2 and
Table 3). These costs (in both speed and accuracy) were sig-
nificant for children at all ages, including the oldest children
(13 years old), but were not significant for adults. The accuracy
difference between the Dots-Congruent and -Incongruent con-
ditions decreased over age, while the RT on Dots-Incongruent as
a percentage of RT on Dots-Congruent remained constant (see
Fig. 6).
A third way to assess the relative cost of increasing inhibitory
demands is to compare performance on the Arrows task (which
required inhibition on the half the trials [the spatially incompati-
ble ones) and required task-switching if encoded as two superor-
dinate rules, but required little memory as each stimulus pointed
to its correct response-site) to performance (a) where inhibition
of the spatially compatible response was required on all trials
(rather than switching between spatially compatible and incom-
patible trials—Dots-Incongruent) or (b) where inhibition of that
response was never required (Dots-Congruent). Inhibiting the
spatially-compatible response some of the time despite the min-
imal memory requirements (in the Arrows task) took a greater
toll on speed and accuracy at every age than did inhibiting the
spatially-compatible response on all trials (Dots-Incongruent,
see Table 2), though those differences were of course smaller
than that between Arrows and Dots-Congruent (where no inhi-
bition was required). Accuracy differences between the Arrows
task and Dots-Incongruent condition were greatest at interme-
diate ages (children of 6-11 years tested in the faster condition)
and smallest among the youngest children (4-6 years, given a
much longer time to respond) and among the two oldest groups
(13-year-olds and adults). Accuracy differences between Arrows
and Dots-Congruent were sizeable at all ages except among
young adults and decreased significantly from 7 to 26 years
(F(I,192) = I5.73, p = 0.0001). Differences in response speed in
the Arrows test and Dots-Incongruent condition were roughly
200 ms at all ages, except among 4-year-olds, where the mean
difference was only 100 ms (all subjects: /[3131= 14.76; sub-
jects ≥6 years: 4223] = 15.76; subjects <6 years: 1[891=6.27;
all p <0.0001). Mean RT differences between Arrows and Dots-
Congruent were roughly 350 ms or more for the youngest chil-
dren (4-6 years, given a long time to respond) and decreased
linearly from 325 ms at 6 years (adult condition) to 180ms
among young adults (except for a spike at 10 years; all
subjects: x[313]=27.00; subjects >6 years: 42231=31.19;
subjects <6 years: 4891= 12.49; all p <0.0001; significant
decrease from 6 years to young adulthood: F(1,222)=5.32,
p <0.0001).
Finally, comparing performance in the Pictures condition to
the Dots-Incongruent condition, like the comparison of Arrows
to Dots-Incongruent, provides a measure of (a) inhibition in
a switching context where it is only required on some trials
(with little or no memory requirement) versus (b) inhibition in
a steady-state context where it is required on every trial (and
memory of a higher order rule and instantiating it on each trial
are required). Accuracy was comparable in these two condi-
tions across all ages but when given only 1250 ms to respond
subjects consistently responded faster in Dots-Incongruent than
in Pictures (all subjects: 43131=7.2, p <0.0001; only those ≥6
years: 42231= 8.57,p <0.0001; only those ≤6 years:11891= 1.9,
p = 0.06; see Table 2). The RT difference (faster in Dots-
Incongruent than in Pictures) tended to increase over age from 6
years through young adulthood (F(1,222)=3.44, p = 0.065) and
was over twice as large among young adults as among 6-year-
olds.
EFTA01098901
M.C. Da rayon et at. /Neuromrholagia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2061
19. Discussion: comparing performance on the tests
that required inhibition (Pictures, Arrows, and Dots)
When minimal memory was required and no task switching,
very young children were reasonably successful at overcom-
ing the prepotent tendency to respond on the same side as the
stimuli consistently on all trials (Dots-Incongruent; 86% cor-
rect at 4-5 years) and on half the trials as long as the rules did
not change (Incongruent trials in the Pictures task; 80% cor-
rect at 4-5 years). On the Dots-Incongruent task the youngest
children were able to perform at a relatively high level when
required to combine (a) holding a superordinate rule in mind
(mentally translating that into the appropriate embedded rule on
each trial) plus (b) inhibiting the dominant tendency to respond
on the same side as a stimulus, but importantly inhibition was
required in steady-state and the rule remained constant. They
had to exercise that inhibition on every trial, not switching
back and forth between sometimes exercising it and sometimes
not. In the Pictures task, there were no higher-order rules to
mentally instantiate. Only two stimulus—response associations
were relevant and memory demands were minimized by hav-
ing a picture of each stimulus mounted immediately above its
associated response button. Critically, the rules never changed.
However, inhibition rather than being continuously required,
was needed on only half the trials. The performance of 4- to
5-year-olds on the Pictures task indicates that they could obey
two stimulus—response rules even though that meant switching
between sometimes responding on the Congruent side (the same
side as the stimulus) and sometimes on the Incongruent side.
Since it is harder to switch back and forth between inhibiting a
dominant response and making it than to consistently inhibit that
response, we had predicted that performance at all ages would
be better in Dots-Incongruent than in Arrows (which required
switching, but minimized memory demands). That prediction
was confirmed. Accuracy was better and speed faster at every
age in the Dots-Incongruent condition than on the Arrows test.
Thus, inhibiting the spatially-compatible response some of the
time even when the stimuli pointed to the correct response (in
the Arrows task) took a greater toll on speed and accuracy at
every age than did inhibiting the spatially-compatible response
all the time (Dots-Incongruent). We had also predicted that per-
formance differences between Dots-Incongruent and Arrows
would decrease over age as cognitive flexibility improved. While
the accuracy difference between these conditions was smaller
in adults, otherwise the markedly better performance on Dots-
Incongruent than Arrows was equally true across all ages, con-
trary to our prediction.
20. Results: the Abstract Shapes test: conditions that
differed in their demands on memory but required little
or no inhibition
The Abstract Shapes test contained two conditions (two
shapes and six shapes), designed to vary working memory
load (two arbitrary rules versus six). The inhibition requirement
was minimal, as all shapes were presented at central fixation
(no spatial incompatibility). As predicted, the six-shape con-
dition was significantly harder than the two-shape condition
(all subjects: 43131=13.60 [accuracy], 20.36 [RT1, and 6.49
IARI, all significant at p <0.0001; subjects >6 years, 1250-
ms ISI: t[2231= 12.27 [accuracy], 20.49 [Ref], and 6.39 [AR],
all significant at p <0.0001; subjects <6 years, 3000-ms ISI:
489] = 6.16, p <0.0001 [accuracy], 9.89, p <0.0001 [RT1, and
2.48, p < 0.02 [ARI: see Fig. 12). Both conditions showed
age-related improvements in performance on all three depen-
dent measures. For two shapes, age-related improvement was
significant on all three dependent measures at p <0.0001 for
subjects >6 years and for all the subjects together (subjects
≥6 years: F(1,222)=21.87 [accuracy], 78.70 [RI], and 16.06
[AR]; all subjects: F(1,312)=26.84 [accuracy], 140.13 IRTI,
and 39.10 [A121). For children 4-6 years of age there was no
difference in speed in the two-shapes condition over age, but
the improvements in accuracy and impulsivity were signifi-
cant (accuracy: F(I ,88)= 5.13, p < 0.03; AR: F(1,88) = 12.75,
p <0.001). Results are similar for the six-shapes condition; age-
related improvement was significant atp <0.0001 for all subjects
together and for those ≥6 years of age, except on RT which was
significant at p <0.0005 for those >6 years (subjects ≥6 years:
F(1,222)=30.48 [accuracy], 12.72 [RT], and 24.79 [AR]; all
subjects: F(1,312)=29.64 [accuracy], 81.11 IRTI, and 39.56
IARI). For the youngest participants there was no significant
age difference in speed on the six-shapes condition, but accu-
racy and impulsivity showed significant improvements over age
(accuracy: F(1,88) = 11.32, p <0.001; AR: =4.88, p <0.03), as
was found for the two-shapes condition.
To test whether there was more change in performance over
age in the six-shapes condition than in the two-shapes con-
dition, difference scores were calculated for each participant
(performance in six-shapes minus two-shapes) for each of the
dependent measures. None of these difference scores (for accu-
racy, speed, or anticipatory responses) varied significantly as a
function of age when all subjects were included in the analyses.
The degree to which the six-shapes condition was more difficult
than the two-shapes condition generally did not change over
age. This suggests that although participants of all ages were
affected by the increased memory load (i.e.. all showed positive
difference scores) the size of this effect changed little over age.
The magnitude of the difference in performance on the six-
versus two-shapes conditions showed no significant change over
age on any of the three dependent measures when all sub-
jects were included or only the youngest children were used.
However, for the 6-year-old through young-adult subjects, the
speed-accuracy tradeoff seemed to vary by age: Accuracy on
the six-shapes condition more closely approximated that on the
two-shape condition in older subjects [9 years through adults
versus 6-8 years old: F(1,162) = 7.39, p < 0.01] while the differ-
ence in RT on the two conditions showed an opposite tendency,
with a smaller RT difference between the two conditions in
younger subjects [9 years through adults versus 6-8 years old:
F(1,162)= II.73,p <0.0011.
Performance in the six-shape condition can also be viewed
as a percentage change from performance in the two-shape con-
dition ([six-shapes minus two-shapes] divided by two-shapes).
Overall, and for the older subjects, there was no significant
EFTA01098902
2062
MC. Davidson er af. /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
0
60
O
>.
u
to 0
u
4t
• 15
a
re
CO
2
1
t C)c
0. AA
N
(A,
50
40
30
20
10
0
120
ott 0
E
.c • too
—
g !14
g
co
f,,
a+
60
ce
0
E
.c
• O
..- a
20
g 2 gpto
rci
(s)
40
---
Dots - Mixed
ma
Abetted 6
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
26
Dote - Incongruent
iiihn Mama 6
(In the background: Dots -
Incongruent as Percentage
Change from Dots.Congment
4
5
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
Age in Years
13
26
Fig. 12. The six-Abstract-Shapes condition as percentage change from the two-Abstract-Shapes condition. (A) Percent change in accuracy-(two
-shape minus six-
shapes) divided by two-shapes (in the background: Dots-Mixed as percentage change front Dots-Congruent) and (B) percent change in reaction time-(two-shape
minus six-shapes) divided by two-shapes (in the background: Dots-Incongruent as percentage change from Dots-Congruent).
change over age in the accuracy difference between the six-
shape and two-shape conditions as a percentage of accuracy in
the two-shape condition. For the youngest children (4-6 years,
tested with 2500-ms stimulus presentation time) the error rate
on six-shapes declined over age and so the percentage change
in accuracy on the six-shape condition compared to the two-
shape condition declined over this age range (F(1,89)=2.65,
p < 0.000 l)—showing the same pattern as seen for percent-
age change in accuracy on Dots-Mixed compared with Dots-
Congruent though the difference for the latter was larger and
remained larger (see Fig. I2A). Indeed, the size of the dif-
ferences, as well as the pattern, among the older subjects for
six-shapes compared to two-shapes was similar to that for Dots-
Mixed compared to Dots-Congruent except that the difference
between six- and two-shapes was particularly small among 9-
year-olds and hence the linear trend did not reach significance
(see Fig. I2A).
For speed of responding, a different picture emerged.
Whereas change over age in the difference between accu-
racy in the six- and two-shape conditions as a percentage of
two-shapes performance was significant only for the younger
children, the reverse was true for the RT difference. The RT
difference in the two conditions as a percentage of speed
in the two-shapes condition changed significantly overall and
among subjects >6 years, but not among the younger children
(all subjects: F(1,312)=29.39, p < 0.00011 subjects >6 years:
F(1,222)=38.10, p <0.0001). Further, whereas the percentage
change in accuracy in six-Abstract-Shapes over age resem-
bled that on Dots-Mixed, the percentage change in RT on six-
Abstract-Shapes over age resembled that on Dots-Incongruent
(see Fig. 128). The change over age in speed on Dots-Mixed as a
percentage of Dots-Congruent dwarfed the age-related change in
six-Abstract-Shapes as a percentage of two-Abstract-Shapes or
Dots-Incongruent as a percentage of Dots-Congruent. Finally,
EFTA01098903
M.C. Davidson et al. /Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2063
whereas the accuracy difference between six- and two-shapes
decreased over age, the difference in response speed on the two
conditions increased over age, as older subjects preserved their
accuracy in the harder condition by sacrificing their speed (see
Fig. 12).
21. Discussion: the Abstract Shapes test: conditions that
differed in their demands on memory but required little
or no inhibition
We had predicted that even very young children would per-
form well at holding two rules in mind when inhibition is not
taxed. Consistent with that prediction, the performance of even
our youngest subjects was excellent in the two-Abstract-Shapes
condition.
Based on our hypothesis that the ability to hold items in
mind matures early, we had predicted that although it would
be harder for everyone to hold more items in mind than fewer,
the relative difficulty of that would not change over age. Over-
all within-subject difference scores (six-Abstract-Shapes versus
two) did not show any change over age in relative difficulty
on any dependent measure. How to answer whether the rela-
tive difficulty changed over age is not straightforward, however.
because how the difference in difficulty was handled changed
over age, i.e., the speed-accuracy tradeoff changed over age
Accuracy in the six-shapes condition more closely approximated
that on the two-shape condition in older subjects (9-year-olds
through young adults) while the difference in speed of respond-
ing in the two conditions showed the opposite tendency, with a
greater RT difference between the two conditions in the same
older subjects. This suggests that older subjects preserved their
accuracy in the harder six-shapes condition by sacrificing their
speed. Hence the speed differential between the two conditions
was largest for these subjects but the accuracy differential was
smallest.
Another measure of whether the relative difficulty of these
two conditions changes over age might be performance on six-
Abstract-Shapes as a percentage change from performance on
two-Abstract-Shapes (thus correcting for differences in base-
line performance). In general, there was no significant change
over age in the accuracy difference between the six-shape and
two-shape conditions as a percentage of accuracy in the two-
shape condition. However, for the youngest children (4-6 years)
the percentage change in accuracy on the six-shape condi-
tion relative to the two-shape condition declined over age (this
same pattern was seen for percentage change in accuracy on
Dots-Mixed compared with Dots-Congruent though the dif-
ference between the Dots conditions was larger and remained
larger).
Whereas change over age in accuracy on six-Abstract-Shapes
as a percentage change from performance on two-Abstract-
Shapes was significant only for the youngest children, the
reverse was true for the RT difference. Here, again, the change
over age in speed on Dots-Mixed as a percentage of Dots-
Congruent dwarfed the age-related change in six-Abstract-
Shapes as a percentage of two-Abstract-Shapes.
22. Results: comparison of performance on the Abstract
Shapes test and the other tests
22.1. First-order comparisons among conditions
The easiest condition of all, across all ages, was Dots-
Congruent (see Table 2). Accuracy was consistently highest
and RT consistently quickest in that condition at all ages.
Indeed, accuracy and speed were significantly better (in all
cases at p <0.0001) in the Dots-Congruent condition than on
the three next easiest conditions, two-Abstract-Shapes, Pictures,
and Dots-Incongruent, with all participants included in the anal-
yses, only the older subjects, or only the youngest subjects (see
Table 4).
Across all ages, accuracy on the two-Abstract-Shapes condi-
tion, the Pictures test, and the Dots-Incongruent condition was
excellent and fully comparable (see Fig. I3A and Table 2).
RT (as opposed to accuracy) was better on the two-Abstract-
Shapes and Dots-Incongruent conditions than on the Pictures
test (see Table 2; RT on two-Abstract-Shapes versus Pictures:
all subjects: O131= 10.55; only those ≥6 years: 4223] = 8.82;
only those ≤6 years: 4891=6.81; all p <0.0001; RT on Dots-
Incongruent versus Pictures: see above).
Table 4
T values for planned comparisons between experimental conditions
Percentage of
correct responses
Response speed
The three of the four easiest conditions'
Dots-Congruent vs. two-Abstract-Shapes
All subjects (d.f. =1.313)
13.52
—19.78
Younger subjects (4-6 years:
d.f. =1.89)
12.54
—26.91
Older subjects (6-26 years:
d.f. = 1.223)
5.72
—6.29
Dots-Congruent vs. Pictures
All subjects (di =1.313)
13.20
—24.00
Younger subjects (4-6 years:
d.f. =1.89)
13.91
—27.84
Older subjects (6-26 years;
d.f. = 1.223)
4.23
—10.31
The three hardest conditions',
Dots-Mixed vs. six-Abstract-Shapes
All subjects (d.f. = 1.313)
—6.24
2.46 (p < 0.01)
Younger subjects (4-6 years:
d.f. =1.89)
—4.22
1.30 NS
Older subjects (6-26 years;
d.f. =1223)
—4.78
224
All significant at p < 0.0001. unless otherwise noted.
a Dots-Incongruent was the other very easy condition. For performance on
Dots-Congruent vs. Dots-Incongruent. see Table 3. Accuracy on two-Abstract-
Shapes. Pictures. and Dots-Incongruent was fully comparable. Response speed
was faster on two-Abstracts-Shapes than on Pictures (all three comparisons sig-
nificant at p <0.0001) and on Dots-Incongruent than Pictures (for all subjects
and older subjects. p < 0.(X)0 I: for younger subjects. p =0.06). Younger chil-
dren were faster on Dots-Incongruent than two-Abstract-Shapes (4891=3.54.
p <0.001). while our older subjects were faster on two-Abstract-Shapes than on
Dots-Incongruent (1(2231=-246. p <0.02).
b Arrows was theotherrelatively difficult task. For Dots-Mixed vs. Arrows. see
the section comparing performance in the three Mixed conditions. There were
no significant differences in either speed or accuracy on six-Abstract-Shapes
and Arrows.
EFTA01098904
206.1
MC. Davidson of al. /Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
Percent Correct
(A)
Reaction Time (in msec)
(B1
%Of Anticipatory Responses
(C)
100
90
80
70
60
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1200•
1000•
800•
600 •
400
5
6
6
7
8
9
10
11
4
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0
5
6
1
St mull PCOSeed00 be 2500 m5
T
T
T
- -a— Arc:
ye Ab..•'nct
13
26
I
13
26
a
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
26
L
1
Staub ',assented br 750 ms
Age In Yens
Fig. 13. Comparisons of the two-Abstract-Shapes conditions with each other and with all the other tasks.
Despite significant differences in performance among
these conditions, these four conditions (Dots-Congruent,
two-Abstract-Shapes, Dots-Incongruent, and Pictures) clearly
proved the easiest for participants. Across the age span, accuracy
was intermediate on the Arrows test and the six-Abstract-Shapes
condition between those four conditions, on the one hand,
and Dots-Mixed condition, on the other (significantly worse
performance on the Arrows test than on the four easier tests:
EFTA01098905
ALC. Davidson et al. /Nettropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2065
all subjects: x[3131=16.42 [accuracy] and 19.15 [RT]; only
those >6 years: :12231= 15.41 [accuracy] and 20.36 [RT];
only those <6 years: 489] = 6.68 [accuracy] and 9.30 [RT]; all
p <0.0001; significantly better performance on Arrows than
on Dots-Mixed, see above; significantly worse performance
on the six-Abstract-Shapes condition than on the four easier
tests: all subjects: 43131= 18.57 [accuracy] and 23.73 [Rh];
only those ≥6 years: 42231= 16.89 [accuracy] and 23.66 [RT];
only those ≤6 years: 489] = 8.26 [accuracy] and 10.15 IRTI; all
p <0.0001).
Although no inhibitory or task-switching demands were
present in the six-Abstract-Shapes condition, holding six
arbitrary rules in mind for hard-to-name, abstract stimuli was
challenging at all ages. However, no test, not even six-Abstract-
Shapes, was as difficult as the Dots-Mixed condition (where
subjects had to hold two superordinate rules in mind, instantiate
them on each trial, inhibit a prepotent response tendency
on incompatible trials, and switch between same-side and
opposite-side rules) all subjects: 4313)=6.2 (accuracy) and 2.4
(p <0.04; RT); only those >6 years: 4223) = 4.2 (accuracy) and
NS (RI'); only those <6 years: 489)=4.78 (accuracy) and 2.15
(p < 0.01;RT); all p <0.0001 except where otherwise noted; see
Fig. 13 and Tables 2 and 4).
Performance on the Arrows test was roughly comparable to
that in the six-Abstract-Shapes condition in both speed and accu-
racy. Accuracy on both was significantly better than accuracy in
the Dots-Mixed condition (see Fig. I 3A). RT on the Arrows test
was generally intermediate between that on the six-Abstract-
Shapes and Dots-Mixed conditions, especially between 4 and 8
years of age (see Table 2), not significantly different from either.
Thus, the task that taxed memory most heavily and included no
inhibitory or task-switching component (six-Abstract-Shapes)
proved approximately equivalent in difficulty at all ages to
the task that taxed memory only minimally (since each stim-
ulus pointed to its correct response), but required inhibition on
incompatible trials and task-switching when subjects used two
hierarchical rules (though one superordinate rule could be used
instead).
22.2. Difference-score analyses of the relative costs of
increasing memory or inhibitory demands
For the youngest children (4-5 years old), inhibitory
demands even in steady-state, took a greater toll on RT than did
memory demands. Their RT difference on Dots-Incongruent
versus Dots-Congruent (which differed only in their inhibitory
requirements) was greater than their RT difference on two-
versus six-Abstract-Shapes (which differed only in their
memory requirements; subjects 4-5 years old: 1[591=2.33,
p <0.03; see Table 2). That was very surprising because the
inhibitory demand in Dots-Incongruent feels rather minimal
to adults while the memory demand in six-Abstract-Shapes
feels quite substantial. For older children ≥8 years and adults'
memory took a greater toll on RT than did inhibition (subjects
≥8 years: Dots-Incongruent minus Dots-Congruent versus six-
Abstract-Shapes minus two-Abstract-Shapes, within-subject
4163] = 5.32, p <0.0001). The individual age group for which
this comparison between difference scores was most highly
significant was young adults (4191= 10.5, p <0.0001).
The size of the differences in the percentage of correct
responses (Dots-Congruent minus Dots-Incongruent compared
with two-Abstract-Shapes minus six-Abstract-Shapes) did not
differ significantly over the age range of 4-9 years. However,
beginning at 10 years, increased memory demands (six versus
two rules) took a greater toll on accuracy than did consistently
inhibiting the tendency to respond on the same side as the stim-
ulus (subjects >10 years: 41031= 3.62, p <0.0005).
Another way to look at the relative cost of increasing
inhibitory demands is to compare performance on the Arrows
task to that on Dots-Incongruent or Dots-Congruent. At all
intermediate ages (6-I I years, all tested under adult condi-
tions), having to switch between inhibiting and not (Arrows)
versus settling in to exercising inhibition on all trials (Dots-
Incongruent) tended to take a greater toll on accuracy and speed
than did having to hold six arbitrary rules in mind rather than two
(subjects 6-11 years, adult conditions: t[2031=1.72, p=0.08
[%correct]; 1.88, p = 0.06 [RT]). For the youngest subjects (4-6
years) given much longer to respond and for the two oldest age
groups (13-year-olds and young adults), the accuracy and RT
costs were comparable. At all ages, the RT costs for having to
exercise inhibition in the Arrows task versus not having to do
so in the Dots-Congruent condition took a much greater toll
on response speed than did increasing the memory load from
two to six arbitrary rules (all subjects: 43131= 11.37; only those
>6 years: t[2231= 12.70; only those <6 years: t[891=5.12; all
p <0.0001). A larger accuracy difference between Arrows versus
Dots-Congruent than between two- versus six-Abstract-Shapes,
however, was only true for the younger two-thirds of the subjects
(subjects ≤9 years: 4210] = 6.65, p < 0.000 I ). This was not sig-
nificant for the older subjects; indeed for adults there was almost
a trend in the reverse direction (see Table 2).
22.3. Correlations between performance on
memory-demanding and inhibition-demanding conditions
If working memory and inhibition are independent then one
might expect little relation between performance on the two-
Abstracts-Shapes condition (that requires little or no inhibition)
and the Pictures test (that requires little or no memory), despite
their relatively equivalent levels of difficulty judging by sub-
jects' performance. Contrary to our predictions, performance
on the two was highly correlated, even after including age in
the partial correlation analyses. This was especially true for
speed of responding. The correlation between the two-Abstracts-
Shapes condition and the Pictures test, controlling for age, was
roughly twice as high for speed as it was for accuracy (all sub-
jects: 4'3131=0.37 [accuracy] and 0.82 [RT]; only those ≥6
years: r[2231=0.32 [accuracy' and 0.67 IRT]; only those <6
years: r[90] = 0.44 [accuracy] and 0.65 [RT]; all significant at
p <0.0001).
Similarly, if working memory and inhibition are independent
then one might expect little relation between performance on
the six-Abstracts-Shapes condition (which heavily taxed mem-
ory but required little or no inhibition) and the Arrows task
EFTA01098906
2066
MC. Davidson a at /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
(which taxed inhibition, but required little memory), even though
both presented relatively equivalent levels of difficulty judging
by subjects' performance. The partial correlations were high,
though not quite as high as those for two-Abstract-Shapes and
Pictures, and were again higher for RT than for accuracy (all
subjects: 4313] =0.30 [accuracy] and 0.74 MTh only those >6
years: r[2231=0.31 [accuracy] and 0.45 [RT]; all four signifi-
cant at p <0.0001; only those ≤6 years: 489] = 0.24, p < 0.01
[accuracy, and 0.43. p <0.001 [M]).
23. Discussion: comparison of performance on the
Abstract Shapes test and the other tests
We predicted that the most difficult condition at all ages
would be the one that taxes inhibition and memory in a switch-
ing context (Dots-Mixed), and that at all ages that would be
even more difficult than holding more information in mind (six
rules) but without an inhibition or switching component (six-
Abstract-Shapes). Consistent with our prediction, we found that
Dots-Mixed was indeed the hardest condition for participants
of all ages and showed the longest developmental progression.
At every age, even holding six arbitrary associations in mind
between responses and stimuli that did not easily lend them-
selves to verbal labels was easier than holding two superordinate
rules in mind and switching randomly between the rule for mak-
ing a prepotent response and the rule for inhibiting that to make
the opposite response. Even young adults found Dots-Mixed to
be the most difficult condition and their performance was worse
there than on even six-Abstract-Shapes. Accuracy did not differ
between Dots-Mixed and six-Abstract-Shapes, but beginning as
early as 5 years of age, participants could perform at that accu-
racy level in six-Abstract-Shapes going at a faster pace than
they could in Dots-Mixed and at the cost of fewer anticipatory
response errors.
Because we hypothesized that memory and inhibition are
independent functions, we had predicted that performance on
the memory-alone conditions of the Abstract Shapes task would
not be highly correlated with performance on conditions that
primarily taxed only inhibition. We had predicted this would
be true both for quite easy and very difficult tasks matched on
difficulty. Our prediction of weak correlations between condi-
tions that primarily taxed working memory and conditions that
primarily taxed inhibition, matching those conditions on diffi-
culty, was not confirmed. Our basic Simon task (Pictures) with
visible memory aids taxed inhibition while placing little or no
demand on memory. We predicted it would be roughly as easy as
remembering the rules for two-Abstract-Shapes when no inhibi-
tion was required (our two-Abstract-Shapes condition) but that
performance on Pictures and two-Abstract-Shapes would not
be highly correlated. As predicted, these two conditions were
indeed roughly matched in difficulty and both relatively easy.
However, contrary to our prediction, their correlation was 0.82
for speed and 0.37 for accuracy.
Similarly,
the
six-Abstracts-Shapes
condition (which
required memory but little or no inhibition) and the Arrows
test (which required inhibition but little or no memory) were
roughly matched in difficulty and both relatively difficult.
Contrary to our prediction, they were correlated 0.74 for speed
and 0.30 for accuracy. Subjects who were better at exercising
inhibition also tended to be better at holding information in
mind and this was especially true for how fast they could
execute their responses.
We also predicted that differences in inhibitory demands
would matter more for young children and differences in mem-
ory demands would matter more for young adults. Findings
consistent with that prediction include that the difference in
accuracy between Arrows versus Dots-Congruent (which differ
in inhibitory demands) was larger for younger children than the
accuracy difference between two- versus six-Abstract-Shapes
(which differ in their memory demands), with a trend in the
reverse direction being found for adults. Other evidence that
inhibition appears to have been more difficult for younger chil-
dren than holding information in mind can be seen in the greater
RT cost exacted by inhibitory demands even in steady-state than
memory demands for the youngest children (4-5 years old). For
example, the RT difference on Dots-Incongruent versus Dots-
Congruent (which differ only in their inhibitory demands) was
greater for the youngest children than their RT difference on two-
versus six-Abstract-Shapes (which differ only in their memory
requirements). Consistent with our prediction that this would
reverse with age, beginning at age 10 years, increased memory
demands (six versus two rules) took a greater toll on accu-
racy than did consistently inhibiting the tendency to respond on
the same side as the stimulus (Dots-Incongruent versus Dots-
Congruent).
24. Results: effect of greater presentation time
Comparison of the performance of the two groups of 6-
year-olds (tested with the two presentation times) showed that
children of 6 years were able to get significantly more responses
correct, and made significantly fewer anticipatory responses,
when they had more time to view the stimuli and compute their
responses.
Often, the 6-year-olds allowed 2.5 s to view each stimulus
and up to 3 s to compute their responses performed at the level
of children 3-4 years older (children 9-10 years of age) who
were given only 0.75 s to view each stimulus and up to 1.25 s to
compute their responses. This was true for the size of the spatial
incompatibility effect on accuracy in the Pictures task (Fig. 3A),
the size of the spatial incompatibility effect on accuracy aver-
aged over the Pictures, Arrows, and Dots tasks (Fig. I IA), the
incidence of anticipatory responses in the Arrows test (Fig. I I C),
percentage of correct responses in the Incongruent and Mixed
blocks of the Dots test (Fig. 3A), and the incidence of anticipa-
tory responses in the Mixed block of the Dots test (Fig. 3C).
Indeed, on some measures the 6-year-olds given more time
to view the stimuli and compute their answers performed better
than children of even I 1 or 13 years tested with shorter stimu-
lus presentation times. The accuracy of 6-year-olds tested with
the longer stimulus presentation time was comparable to that of
I 3-year-olds given less time on the Pictures test (Fig. 11A), the
Arrows test (Fig. 1 IA), and six-Abstract-Shapes test (Fig. I 3A).
In the interaction of rule switching and response switching on
EFTA01098907
ALC. Davidson a al. /Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2067
accuracy in the Arrows and in the Dots test, the 6-year-olds
given more time showed a pattern that more closely approx-
imated that seen in adults than did children of any other age
(Figs. 9A and 10A). The accuracy of these 6-year-olds in remem-
bering six arbitrary stimulus-response associations compared
with their accuracy in remembering only two showed less of a
cost than did that of even young adults (Fig. 12A).
In most cases the 6-year-olds tested at the shorter stimulus
presentation times performed roughly comparable to the chil-
dren of 4 and 5 years given more time. The one and only place
that no advantage was found for giving 6-year-olds more time
and no cost was found for giving them less time was on the
two-Abstract-Shapes task, where time to view the stimuli and
determine their response had no effect on performance.
25. General discussion
We investigated the development, and interactions overdevel-
opment, of inhibitory control, memory, and task switching.
Our computerized battery included tasks designed to manip-
ulate demands on retaining, and working with, information
held in mind and/or inhibition, independently and together, in
single-task and in task-switching contexts. The ability to inhibit
attention to distractors makes possible selective and sustained
attention. The ability to inhibit a strong behavioral inclination
helps make change possible, as well as social politeness. Inhibi-
tion, thus, provides us a measure of control over our attention and
actions. External stimuli and engrained behavioral tendencies
exert strong influences on our behavior, but inhibition permits
us the possibility to act otherwise. The ability to hold and manip-
ulate information in mind makes it possible for us to remember
our plans and others' instructions, relate one thing to another,
including relating the present to the future and the past, and to
act on the basis of information not perceptually present. Cogni-
tive flexibility is critical in a changing world. It is essential for
adaptability and for the creativity that comes from being able to
see things in new or different ways.
25.1. How our predictions concerning memory and
inhibition fared
We predicted that inhibitory demands would account for a
greater proportion of the variance in children's performance
than in adults, and the more so the younger the child. Con-
sistent with our prediction, Dots-Incongruent (where inhibition
of the spatially-compatible response was required on all trials)
was more difficult than Dots-Congruent (where the spatially-
compatible response was correct on all trials) and the more
so the younger the children. Accuracy and impulsivity dif-
ferences between those two conditions decreased over age.
The RI' difference on Dots-Incongruent versus Dots-Congruent
(which differed only in their inhibitory demands) was greater
for the youngest children than the RT difference on two- ver-
sus six-Abstract-Shapes (which differed only in their memory
requirements). This finding surprises adults who have taken our
task battery because for adults the inhibitory demand in Dots-
Incongruent feels rather minimal while the memory demand
in six-Abstract-Shapes feels quite substantial. However, this is
fully consistent with greater costs being exacted by inhibitory
demands even in steady-state than memory demands for the
youngest children. Also consistent with this prediction, we found
that the spatial incompatibility effect (the cost of inhibiting the
pull to respond on the same side as the stimulus) was greater the
younger the children. This suggests that the younger the chil-
dren, the harder it was for them to muster inhibition at either
(a) the level of attention to disregard an irrelevant aspect of the
stimulus (its spatial location) and/or (b) the level of response to
override the prepotent tendency to respond on the same side as
the stimulus.
We looked at the spatial incompatibility effect in the context
of lower- and higher-order rules, different memory loads, and in
the context of task-switching. While in the Pictures test, the typi-
cal low-level rules pertaining to individual stimuli were used and
memory demands were minimized by the use of icons over the
response-sites, we also investigated the spatial-incompatibility
effect in hybrid, conceptual tasks (Arrows and Dots) where the
rules were more abstract, spatial location had to be integrated
with stimulus identity, and no icons were provided to remind
subjects of the stimulus—response mappings. The working mem-
ory requirements were greater for these later tasks because they
required mental computation to determine the correct response.
Instead of the rule being "for A press left" (the typical rule on
Simon tasks, which requires attending only to the stimulus or a
particular property of the stimulus), the rule for the Arrows and
Dots tasks was "for A press on the side opposite A:' Knowledge
of only which stimulus appeared or only where it appeared was
insufficient on these tasks; those two pieces of information had
to be integrated. The Arrows and Dots tasks differed from each
other in that the memory demands were minimal on the Arrows
task because the stimulus pointed to the correct response on each
trial.
In the Pictures task spatial incompatibility effects were signif-
icant for both RT and accuracy for children of all ages, produced
the greatest effect on RT, and decreased more in size as a function
of age than on the Arrows or Dots tasks. Even at 13 years of age,
children still showed a significantly greater Simon effect on the
Pictures task than did young adults. The spatial incompatibility
effect was weakest and showed the least change over age in the
Dots task, even though in the Dots and Arrows tasks the spatial
location of the stimuli had to be explicitly taken into account
and on the Pictures task it did not. The Dots-Mixed condition
was the only task in which the spatial incompatibility effect was
not evident in both RT and accuracy. In Dots-Mixed, the spatial
incompatibility effect was evident only in RI', its effect on RT
was weaker for the youngest children (4-6 years old) and adults
than in the Arrows or Pictures tests, and the size of its effect on
RT did not change significantly over age. The Arrows condition
produced a significant spatial incompatibility effect on both RT
and accuracy, and a decrease in the size of the effect on accuracy
(though not on 121) over age. These results — a stronger spatial
incompatibility effect the easier the task — are consistent with
results in the literature showing that this effect decreases as a
function of task difficulty (Hommel, 1993, 1994; Vu & Proctor,
2004). However, those results have previously been interpreted
EFTA01098908
2068
MC. Davidson a at /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
to mean that anything that increases response time will decrease
the Simon effect (giving the automatic activation of the irrele-
vant stimulus location information time to decay). In contrast,
we found that although younger children took much longer to
respond than older children, they showed a larger spatial incom-
patibility effect.
The larger Simon effect found for the younger children might
indicate that their ability to exercise inhibition of the pull to
respond on the same side as the stimulus was weaker than that
of older children. It may have also been affected by the greater
likelihood of younger children to use verbal mediation. Though
the Pictures task could be solved by simple perceptual matching,
some younger children named the stimulus out loud on some tri-
als. Similarly, on the Dots task, younger children often called out
the rule ("same" or "different") on trials in the Mixed condition.
In adults, the Simon effect is stronger, and does not diminish with
consecutive incompatible trials, when the stimulus or response
has a verbal property (Proctor & Vu, 2002).
The lack of an accuracy cost on spatially incompatible (Incon-
gruent) trials in the Mixed block of the Dots task is in sharp con-
trast to the results when comparing separate blocks of Congruent
and Incongruent trials on the task, which showed a significant
spatial incompatibility effect for children of all ages in both
speed and accuracy, though not for adults. The lack of a spatial
incompatibility effect for accuracy within the Dots-Mixed con-
dition, in conjunction with the increase in RT and reduction in
accuracy for all trials in that condition relative to the other two
Dots conditions, may indicate that participants exercised inhibi-
tion on both Congruent and Incongruent trials when those trials
were intermixed in a difficult task-switching context. It may also
be due to an order effect (see below).
The results of Crone et al. (in press), with a task similar to
our Dots task and with subjects ages 7-8, 10-I 2, and 20-25
years, are similar to ours. Like us, they found a stronger Simon
effect comparing across the single-task blocks than in the Mixed
block, but unlike us they found that the Simon effect disappeared
altogether in the Mixed block. Like us, they found the single-task
block Simon effect to be significant for both accuracy and RT,
but unlike us they found no change in the size of the accuracy
or RT Simon effects over age.
Our study of spatial compatibility effects with conceptual
rules and switching between those rules, as well as stimulus-
level S—R associations, deserves additional follow-up. Our Dots
and Arrows tests required integrating stimulus-appearance infor-
mation with spatial location information. Since spatial location
was relevant to the correct response they were not pure Simon
tasks, but hybrid spatial incompatibility tasks. There is evidence
that the neural bases for working memory of object-appearance
and spatial-location information are somewhat different (Haxby,
Petit, Ungerleider, & Courtney, 2000; Levy & Goldman-Rakic,
2000; Mecklinger & Mueller, 19%) and spatial location is
exactly the stimulus property that feeds the spatial-compatibility
bias. In standard Simon tasks, subjects would perform better if
they could (theoretically) screen out the location of the stimulus,
but on our Dots and Arrows tasks information about the location
of the stimulus is critical for determining the correct response.
Will results be similar to those on our Dots test, if the conceptual
rules are, for example, "If the stimulus is an animal, press right;
if the stimulus is a vehicle, press left"? Here, the same number
of mental steps ([1] Is the stimulus an animal or a vehicle? [2]
Where do I press for that?) would be required as in our Dots
test ([
Which rule [same side or opposite side] pertains to this
stimulus? [2] Which side is the stimulus on?). That would be a
conceptual task with higher-order rules (like our Dots task), but
unlike our Dots task it would be a pure Simon task, not a hybrid.
Similarly, Wascher and colleagues (Wascher, Schatz, Kuder,
& Verleger, 2001; Wascher & Wolber, 2004; Wiegand &
Wascher, 2005) provide evidence for the involvement of both
visuomotor and cognitive mechanisms in Simon task perfor-
mance. Modifying the task slightly (e.g., presenting vertical
rather than horizontal stimuli) changed the distributions of RT
scores, and was taken as evidence for involvement of a cognitive
component. An interesting developmental question is, "Does the
effect function across Simon task variants change over age and
if so in what ways and why?" Our manipulations (increasing
or decreasing the working memory load) might also change the
distribution of RT scores but, unfortunately, the vincentization
procedure used by Wascher and colleagues involves splitting the
RT distributions into quintiles (i.e., quartiles or even deciles) and
would result in relatively few datapoints per bin in the current
study. Future research with these tasks with more data per subject
could allow more thorough investigation of the RT distributions
across development.
In young adults, in whom inhibitory control is more mature,
we had predicted that memory demands would exact a greater
cost than inhibitory demands. Beginning at 10 years, increased
memory demands (six versus two rules) took a greater toll
on accuracy than did consistently inhibiting the tendency to
respond on the same side as the stimulus (Dots-Incongruent
versus Dots-Congruent)—the opposite of the pattern observed
in the youngest children. Also in line with the greater role
of memory in what is demanding for adults, taxing cognitive
flexibility and inhibition in a switching context was not that
hard for adults if memory demands were minimal. Unlike
the case for children of all ages in our study, the Arrows
test was easy for adults. However, the Dots-Mixed condition,
which presented the same demands on inhibition and cognitive
flexibility as did the Arrows test but in addition taxed working
memory more, was difficult even for adults. The difference in
accuracy on Dots-Mixed and Arrows, which differed only in
the greater working memory demands in the Dots condition,
was greater for young adults than for children at any age from 7
to 13 years. The greater memory demands in the Dots condition
made a big difference for adults and the youngest children, but
not for the majority of children (aged 7-13 years).
Since we are discussing performance on Dots-Incongruent
and Dots-Congruent here, it is appropriate to note that one of
the striking differences between the results for children and
adults was that effects elicited only in Mixed blocks (e.g., in
Dots-Mixed) with adults were found in children even in single-
task blocks (e.g., Dots-Incongruent versus Dots-Congruent
Blocks). For example, even though switching between rules
that require inhibiting a prepotent response or making it is what
was most difficult at all ages, even inhibition in steady state
EFTA01098909
M.C. Davidson a al. /Neuromrhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2069
(Dots-Incongruent) was more difficult for children than going
with their prepotent response on every trial (Dots-Congruent).
At every age, without exception, children were slower and less
accurate in the Dots-Incongruent block than the Dots-Congruent
Block. Thus, inhibition, even in steady state, was sufficiently dif-
ficult for children to elicit a cost in their performance. This was
not true for adults. Adults performed comparably in both speed
and accuracy in the Dots-Congruent and Dots-Incongruent
conditions. They required having to switch between the two
conditions for a significant effect on their performance to be
evident.
These results for adults are consistent with those reported in
other studies of the spatial incompatibility effect in adults. As we
found here, adults tend not to show the spatial incompatibility
effect if Congruent and Incongruent trials are administered in
separate, single-task blocks (Stunner et al., 2002; Valle-Inclan
et al., 2002; Verbruggen et al., 2005; Wiihr, 2004,2005). Adults
evidently re-set their default response if several trials in a row
are Incongruent and so are no slower on those Incongruent trials
than on Congruent ones. Indeed, adults can show a reverse spa-
tial incompatibility effect when switching back to responding
on the same side as a stimulus after several trials of respond-
ing on the side opposite the stimulus (e.g., Logan & Zbrodoff,
1979). Children from 4 to 13 years of age, on the other hand,
evidently did not re-set their default response. They showed the
spatial incompatibility effect with Congruent and Incongruent
trials administered in separate, single-task blocks. Inhibition in
steady state took a toll on the performance of children even as
old as 13 years, but not on that of adults.
Note that participants (including adults) in our study showed
a spatial compatibility effect in Dots-Mixed although all sub-
jects were tested on Dots-Incongruent immediately before that.
Just as adults typically show little cost in making spatially-
incompatible responses if they are tested on a block where they
need to do that on every trial or most trials, Tagliabue, Zorzi,
Umilta, and Bassignani (2000) found no Simon effect in Mixed
blocks when adults were given a run of Incongruent trials before-
hand. Given those results it is possible that we might have found
a much stronger spatial incompatibility effect in Dots-Mixed if
it had been preceded by a block of Congruent trials. In order
to test participants at all ages under the same conditions we
had not varied task order, so further study would be needed to
address that interesting possibility. It is also possible that other
effects observed here might appear different if the tasks were
administered in a different order. For example, Dots-Incongruent
was always tested after Dots-Congruent. We do not think that
caused a difference in the memory demands between the two
conditions because the rule for Dots-Incongruent was taught
and practiced immediately before that block just as the rule for
Dots-Congruent was taught and practiced immediately before
that block, but given that we did not vary task order we cannot
prove that that is the case
Based on our hypothesis that inhibitory control is extremely
problematic for very young children, we predicted they would
perform poorly on all trials requiring inhibition (Incongruent
trials and switch trials) and that those effects would be additive.
That is, we predicted they would perform worst on switching
to the Incongruent (more difficult) condition; opposite to the
pattern typically reported in adults. We predicted that after that
early period, we would see greater switch costs at all ages for
switching to the easier (Congruent) condition than to the harder
(Incongruent) condition (consistent with the asymmetric switch
costs previously reported in adults ]Allport & Wylie, 2000:
Allport et al., 1994; De Jong, 1995; Kleinsorge & Heuer, 1999:
Los, 1996 and Stoffels, 1996; Wylie & Allport, 2000]). Further,
for intermediate-age children, who are beginning to exercise bet-
ter inhibitory control, we reasoned that doing so should require
greater effort than in older participants and so predicted that
undoing that inhibition (switching back to making the dominant
response) should exact a greater cost in those children than in
adults. Thus, we predicted that beginning after 6 or 7 years of
age, asymmetric switch costs would be larger in younger than
older participants. These predictions were confirmed for RT On
both Arrows and Dots-Mixed, children of 4-6 years showed a
greater Kr cost for switching to the Incongruent rule than the
Congruent one. In both of those conditions, adults and older
children showed a greater RT switch cost for switching to the
Congruent than the Incongruent rule (consistent with previous
reports of asymmetric switch costs). In both Arrows and Dots-
Mixed, the differential RT cost of switching to the Congruent
rather than the Incongruent rule was largest at 7-10 years of
age. For accuracy, on the other hand, across the age spectrum
on both Arrows and Dots-Mixed, people were more accurate
when both the rule and the response changed than when just the
rule changed. Thus the asymmetric switch costs reported in the
literature primarily for RT, were found here for accuracy at all
ages (even among the youngest children).
Crone et al. (in press) found results for Kr that resemble
ours for accuracy and results for accuracy that resemble ours for
RT. Across their age spectrum (7-23 years), they found faster
responses when both the rule and the response changed than
when just the rule switched. Across our age spectrum (4-45
years), we found a greater percentage of correct responses when
both the rule and the response changed than when just the rule
switched. We found this effect on accuracy to be largest at
8-10 years; they found this effect on KI' to be largest at 7—8
years. Mirroring in reverse these greater effects in young chil-
dren versus older children and adults, Mayr (2001) found the RT
effect (faster rule switching when the response also changed) to
be greater in older versus younger adults. Crone et al. found
that accuracy costs did not show the pattern they expected;
more errors occurred on switch trials when the response-site
also changed than when it remained the same. We similarly
found slower responding on rule-switch, response-switch tri-
als until age 13 on our Dots-Mixed task which resembles Crone
et al.'s (this encompasses two of Crone et al.'s three age groups),
but unlike Crone et al.'s results for accuracy, we found faster
responding when both rule and response switched for adults.
We had predicted that even the youngest children would find
it easy to hold two rules in mind and that although it would be
harder for everyone to hold more rules in mind than fewer, the
relative difficulty of this would not change over age. Indeed, as
predicted, holding two arbitrary rules in mind was easy even for
our youngest participants. At all ages performance was excellent
EFTA01098910
2070
MC. Davidson a at /Neumpsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
on the two-Abstracts-Shapes and Dots-Congruent conditions
(the latter requiring holding a superordinate rule in mind and
mentally translating that into the appropriate embedded rule
on each trial). This is consistent with other evidence that chil-
dren can hold two conditional rules in mind by 4(1/2 )-5 years of
age (Campione & Brown, 1974; Doan & Cooper, 1971; Gollin,
1964, 1965, 1966; Gollin & Liss, 1962; Osier & Kofsky, 1965;
Shepard, 1957). Although everyone found the increased memory
load (six versus two Abstract Shapes) more difficult, the size of
the effect changed little over age in either speed or accuracy
when all subjects were included in the analyses. More fine-
grained analyses, however, showed that how the difference in
difficulty was handled differed over age. The speed-accuracy
tradeoff changed over age. Accuracy on six-shapes more closely
approximated that on two-shapes the older the subjects. RT
in the two conditions, however, diverged more the older the
subjects.
Across conditions, older participants slowed down to pre-
serve their accuracy on more difficult trials. Thus they showed
sizeable KI' differences and small accuracy differences. An ele-
gant analysis of this tendency of adults to alter their response
times to preserve a constant level of accuracy in the face of vari-
ations in task difficulty is provided by Usher and McClelland
(2001) and Usher, Olami, and McClelland (2002). In our study,
younger children often showed less of a change in speed and
hence showed very large differences in accuracy across trials of
differing difficulty. For example, older participants were better
able to modulate their speed and slowed down in the difficult
Dots-Mixed condition relative to the easy Dots-Congruent con-
dition to minimize a reduction in accuracy. Younger participants
(even those given a very long time to respond) kept their response
speed more constant across conditions, perhaps because they
were too impulsive to take more time when they needed it,
at the cost of accuracy in the difficult conditions. Hence, for
example, the accuracy difference between the Dots-Mixed and
Dots-Congruent conditions decreased with age but RT differ-
ences between those two conditions increased over age (see
Fig. 6). Similarly, the mixing cost of Congruent and Incongru-
ent trials being mixed together declined over age for accuracy
but increased over age for RT (see Fig. 7). Likewise over age,
differences in performance on the six- and two-Abstract-Shapes
conditions declined in accuracy but increased in RT.
The very youngest children (4-5 years of age) were given a
long time to respond (3000 ms) so it is unlikely that they lacked
sufficient time to modulate their response speed. It is more likely
that they had difficulty inhibiting impulsive responding, i.e.,
difficulty withholding their response long enough to take the
time they really needed. For instance, the RTs for children of
4-5 years on nonswitch Incongruent trials in the Dots-Mixed
condition differed little from their RTs in the easier single-task
Dots-Incongruent block. This was true even though their KI's
in both conditions were on average less than half of the time
allotted, so they had time to compute their responses but did
not make use of that extra time. Their inhibitory problems can
also be seen in their greater likelihood to respond impulsively
before a stimulus appeared and to fail to promptly stop pressing
a response button after responding.
These findings concerning not taking the time they needed
are fully consistent with results reported by Gerstadt, Diamond,
and Hong (1994) and Diamond, Kirkham, and Amso (2002) on
a different task, the Day—Night Stroop-like task, where chil-
dren had to say "night" to a daytime image and "day" to a
nighttime image. Gerstadt et al. (1994) found that: (a) those chil-
dren of 3(1/2 )-4(1/2 ) years who took more time to compute their
answers were able to answer correctly on more trials than chil-
dren who answered more quickly and (b) within child, on those
trials where a child of 3(1/2 )-4(1/2 ) years took longer to respond,
the child was more likely to be correct. Diamond et al. (2002)
manipulated time to view the stimulus and compute the response
by chanting a ditty to the child either after the stimulus was pre-
sented but before the child could respond or between trials before
the stimulus was presented. Diamond et al. found that 4- and
4(1/2 )-year-old children were correct on significantly more trials
in the manipulation that gave them more stimulus-viewing and
more response-computation time (ditty chanted while stimulus
was visible) but performed no better than in the basic condition
when the extra time could be used to remind themselves of the
rules but not to instantiate the correct rule for the current trial
(ditty chanted between trials, before stimulus was visible).
On the other hand, we have evidence here that if a task is
sufficiently easy that 4-5-years-olds can compute the answer
in roughly a second, they will modulate their speed to preserve
their accuracy. On the Pictures test, for example, children of
4-5 years slowed way down on Incongruent trials relative to
Congruent ones, thereby preserving their accuracy so that the
difference in their accuracy on Incongruent versus Congruent
trials was smaller than that seen by older children of 6-8 years
given less time to compute their responses (see Fig. 3). Simi-
larly, on the Arrows test, children of 4-5 years used the ample
time allowed them to maintain an accuracy level of over 80%,
a level of accuracy not seen when given less time to respond
until children were 10-11 years old. Children of 4-6 years also
showed smaller local switch costs on the Arrows test than did the
older children; they achieved this by using their allotted time to
slow down on the switch trials; their KI' switch costs were over
twice those of participants at any other age.
Certainly there is considerable evidence that 6-year-olds ben-
efited from having a longer time to respond (3000 ms versus
1250ms). The results clearly show that by 6 years, if allowed
more time to respond, children will take advantage of that to
reduce their errors.
The relative lack of response speed modulation in children
of 6-8 years tested in the adult condition probably had a dif-
ferent cause than that for children of 4-5. In the case of the
6—8-year-olds, the response window (1250 ms ISI; 750 ms stim-
ulus presentation) was likely too brief to allow them the time they
needed to slow down sufficiently in the more difficult conditions
to preserve their accuracy. Thus, even on the easy Pictures task,
they could not slow down sufficiently on incompatible trials to
preserve their accuracy, and so although their KI's were longer
on incompatible trials, their accuracy suffered on those trials
more than was found at any other age.
Given our hypothesis that working memory and inhibition
are independent, we had predicted that performance on tasks
EFTA01098911
M.C. Davidson a al. /Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2071
that tax primarily memory or primarily inhibition would not
be highly correlated. Instead, when the tasks were matched for
difficulty, speed on working memory and inhibition tasks was
highly correlated. Individuals who were fast at exercising inhi-
bition also tended to be fast on working memory measures, even
after accounting for age effects. Accuracy across working mem-
ory and inhibition measures was also correlated, though not as
strongly.
Finally, we had predicted that the most difficult condition
at all ages would be the one that taxed inhibition and memory
in a switching context (Dots-Mixed) and that that would even
be more difficult than having to hold much more information
in mind but with no inhibition or switching component (six-
Abstract-Shapes). Indeed, as predicted, we found that at every
age, including for young adults, holding two superordinate
rules in mind and switching randomly between the rule for
making a prepotent response and the rule for inhibiting that to
make the opposite response (Dots-Mixed) was the most difficult
condition, harder even than holding six arbitrary rules in mind
for stimuli that did not easily lend themselves to verbal labels
(six-Abstract-Shapes).
212. How our predictions concerning cognitive flexibility
and task switching fared
Cognitive flexibility (switching, overcoming inertial tenden-
cies) was far harder than consistent inhibition in steady state or
than holding and manipulating a couple of items in mind, and
showed a much longer developmental progression. The cost, and
longer developmental progression, of cognitive flexibility can be
seen most clearly on the Arrows test, where little or no memory
was required as the arrow pointed to the correct response on
every trial. Since we hypothesized that switching is so difficult,
we had predicted that having to switch between tasks even when
memory demands were minimized (as in the Arrows test) would
show a long developmental progression. This was confirmed.
Even by age 10, the percentage of correct responses did not
exceed 80% on the Arrows test, and even by the age of 13, chil-
dren were not yet performing at adult levels on the Arrows task.
At all ages, the RT costs for having to exercise inhibition
in a switching context on the Arrows task versus not having to
exercise inhibition or switch (Dots-Congruent condition) took a
much greater toll on response speed than did increasing the mem-
ory load from two to six arbitrary rules However, consistent with
inhibition in a switching context being disproportionately dif-
ficult for young children and memory being disproportionately
difficult for adults, even young adults, the larger accuracy dif-
ference between Arrows versus Dots-Congruent than between
two- versus six-Abstract-Shapes was found only for the younger
two-thirds of the subjects (children ≤9 years).
Consistent with cognitive flexibility improving with age,
performance differences on Dots-Incongruent and Dots-Mixed
decreased over age. If cognitive flexibility is improving,
however, one would also expect the difference in perfor-
mance on Dots-Incongruent and Arrows to decrease over age.
The markedly faster speed and better accuracy in the Dots-
Incongruent condition compared with the Arrows test, however,
remained strong throughout the age range for children, though
the accuracy difference disappeared among young adults. This
may suggest that much of the age-related reduction in the cost
of exercising cognitive flexibility comes after 13 years of age.
Consistent with the "all or none" principle (Diamond, in
preparation), it should be easier to inhibit a dominant response all
the time than only some of the time. We thus predicted that per-
formance at all ages would be better in Dots-Incongruent (where
inhibition was consistently required on all trials) than in Mixed
blocks of Dots or Arrows (where inhibition is only required on
the 50% of trials that are Incongruent), and that this difference
would be greater the younger the children. Indeed, we found that
inhibiting the spatially-compatible response some of the time
in a switching context despite minimal memory requirements
(the Arrows task) took a greater toll on speed and accuracy at
every age than did inhibiting the spatially-compatible response
consistently on all trials (Dots-Incongruent). Not surprisingly,
the differences were even larger between Dots-Mixed and Dots-
Incongruent. Our prediction that the difference in performance
between Dots-Mixed and Dots-Incongruent would decrease over
age as cognitive flexibility improved fared less well as these
differences remained large at all ages, though the difference
in accuracy was larger the younger the children. Similarly, the
accuracy difference between Dots-Incongruent and Arrows was
smaller in adults than in children, but otherwise the markedly
better performance on Dots-Incongruent than on Arrows was
equally true across all ages.
Also consistent with the "all or none" principle is that perfor-
mance should be better on not-switching anything (repeat-rule,
repeat-response trials) and on switching everything (switch tri-
als where the response-site also switches) than on trials where
either the rule or response-site changes but not the other. We
had predicted that these effects, heretofore documented only in
adults and older children (Kleinsorge, 1999; Meiran, 2000a,b;
Rogers & Monsell, 1995; Schuch & Koch, 2004), would also
be found in young children. We predicted that throughout our
age span, participants would do better at switching tasks if the
response-site also changed and would be slower and less accu-
rate on switch trials when the response-site remained the same
as on the previous trial. In both Dots-Mixed and Arrows, older
children and adults were indeed better at switching tasks if the
response-site also changed than if the response-site remained
the same as on the preceding trial. However, contrary to our
prediction, the youngest children (children of 4-8 years) per-
formed better on switch trials where the response-site remained
the same. They were faster on switch than nonswitch trials and
on response-switch rather than response-stay trials and those
effects tended to be additive. These results raise the possibility
that perhaps the hypothesized "all or none" default of cogni-
tive systems is an efficient characteristic of the mature cognitive
system. It appears, in this particular context anyway, that piece-
meal, additive effects are more characteristic of young children's
performance.
Research in adults has shown that performance on nonswitch
trials (where the rule remains the same as on the previous trial)
is worse when these trials are presented in the context of peri-
odically having to switch than in the context of a block of all
EFTA01098912
2072
MC. Davidson a
/Neumps)rhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
nonswitch trials (e.g., Fagot, 1994; Mayr, 2000a). We found that
indeed performance was worse-slower, less accurate, and char-
acterized by more anticipatory errors-on nonswitch trials within
the Mixed block of the Dots task than within either single-task
block of the task. Such global switch costs were among the
strongest effects found in this study. It is not that participants
forgot the rules when they had to hold both the Congruent and
Incongruent rules in mind for the Mixed block. Indeed, chil-
dren often called out the correct higher-order rule on trials in the
Mixed condition (e.g., "same," "opposite," "opposite," "same")
even as they were making errors. The problem seemed to be in
quickly translating that rule into the correct response. The pres-
ence of global switch costs at all ages in our study is consistent
with task-switching studies in children, young adults, and older
adults; all studies consistently find global switch costs through-
out the age spectrum.
We had predicted that global switch costs would decrease
over age. That prediction was only partially confirmed. The
global switch cost in accuracy declined from 9 to 13 years of
age, as predicted, but the global switch cost in RT increased from
6 years through early adulthood (see Fig. 7). Adults adjusted
their speed to preserve their accuracy; younger children did that
much less hence the difference in the speed-accuracy trade-off
with age. This mirrors exactly what was found by Cohen et
al. (2001) using a very different task-switching paradigm. They
used Meiran's (1996) task-switching paradigm presented as a
computer game. A smiley face appeared at one of four quadrants
of a square, preceded by a cue indicating the relevant dimension
(horizontal ["is the cue in the left or right half?"[ or vertical ["is
the cue in the top or bottom bairn). This was administered to
150 children (ages 5-11 years) and 16 young adults. They found
that global switch costs in accuracy decreased from 5 to II years,
and even 11-year-olds were not as accurate in mixed blocks as
young adults, but global switch costs in speed of responding
increased over age (just as we found here).
Contrary to our findings, however, though with only a few
overlapping ages, Reimers and Maylor (2005) found that global
RT switch costs decreased linearly from 10 to 18 years. Like
us, Crone et al. (in press) found significant global switch costs
in both speed and accuracy. However, unlike us, Cohen et al.
(2001), or Reimers and Maylor (2005), Crone and colleagues
found no change in the size of global switch costs with age
in either speed or accuracy from 7 to 8 years to 23 years.
Most studies in older adults report greater global RT switch
costs in elders than in young adults (Kray et al., 2004; Kray &
Lindenberger, 2000; Mayr% 2000; van Asselen & Ridderinlchof,
2000), though Kray et al. (2002) report that no difference in
global RI' switch costs is found between younger and older
adults when switches between tasks are unpredictable. The dif-
ference between predictable and unpredictable switches would
also explain the differences across studies in whether global RT
switch costs differ between young children and adults. The only
study to find smaller global RT switch costs with increasing
age from young children to adults was the one study that also
predictably switched between tasks (Reimers & Maylor, 2005),
where a predictable double-alternation switching pattern was
used in the Mixed block.
Cepeda et al. (2001) calculated global switch costs differ-
ently from the studies above. They compared performance on
all trials in Mixed blocks (not just the nonswitch trials) to perfor-
mance in single-task blocks. Just as we found that the difference
in performance on Dots-Mixed versus Dots-Congruent or Dots-
Incongruent decreased over age from 6 years to young adult-
hood, so too Cepeda and colleagues found that the difference
in performance in their Mixed blocks versus their single-task
blocks decreased from their youngest age (7 years) to young
adulthood. Cohen et al. (2001) similarly report a linear decline in
the difference in performance in Mixed blocks versus single-task
blocks for both speed and accuracy, with their oldest children
(age I 1 years) still showing a larger difference in both dependent
measures than young adults.
This illustrates an important point. Inhibiting a dominant
response requires effort, but it is not nearly as difficult if that
inhibition needs to be consistently maintained (as in Dots-
Incongruent). What is far more demanding is switching back
and forth between sometimes inhibiting a dominant response
and sometimes making it. What is truly difficult is overcom-
ing one's inertial tendency to continue in the same mindset,
switching between one mental set and another. Even now many
investigators still administer the Stroop task in single-task blocks
(blocks of always reading the word and blocks of always nam-
ing the ink color). While it requires effort to focus on the ink
color (and one can see that toll in slowed responding) one can
get in the mode of always focusing on the ink color and the
task is quite manageable. It is far harder not to be able to rely
on always ignoring the word; to have to switch back and forth
between sometimes reading the word and sometimes naming the
ink color.
Because of floor effects (people are already slower and more
error-prone in the Incongruent-only block), we predicted that
the effect of context (the Mixed block versus single-task block)
would be greater on Congruent than Incongruent trials. We fur-
ther predicted that this should be more evident the younger the
child. That is, we predicted that the younger the child, the closer
performance on "easy" (Congruent, nonswitch) trials would fall
to the level of "harder" trials in the context of sometimes hav-
ing to switch back and forth. Consistent with this prediction, we
found that the cost of mixing nonswitch trials in with switch
trials and mixing Congruent trials in with Incongruent ones,
versus having single-task blocks, was greater for the Congru-
ent (easier) nonswitch trials than the Incongruent nonswitch
trials. When these trials were administered in separate single-
task blocks, fewer errors occurred on Congruent trials (except
for adults where accuracy did not differ in the Congruent and
Incongruent single-task blocks) but when they were intermixed
within the same block comparable numbers of errors occurred
on Congruent and Incongruent trials. Participants were able to
respond much faster on nonswitch Congruent trials when all
trials in the block were Congruent than when some were Incon-
gruent, though only Congruent trials following a Congruent trial
were included in these analyses. The same was true for Incon-
gruent trials but to a lesser extent. The effect of context (Mixed
block versus single-task block) appears to have been larger for
the faster, more automatic response (responding on the same side
EFTA01098913
M.C. Davidson a al. /Neuromrhologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2073
as the stimulus) than for the slower, more demanding response
(inhibiting the dominant response and responding opposite to it).
However, contrary to the portion of our prediction concerning
development, the size of the greater effect of context on Congru-
ent versus Incongruent trials did not change significantly over
age.
The difficulty of the harder condition is underestimated in
single-task blocks (always having to respond opposite to the
side of the stimulus tends to reduce its difficulty because you
get in the mode of doing that) and the ease of the easier condi-
tion is underestimated in Mixed blocks (because people tend to
slow down across the board on such blocks). Comparing non-
switch Incongruent trials in the Dots-Mixed block to nonswitch
Congruent trials in the Dots-Congruent block may come closest
to approximating the full difficulty of inhibiting the tendency to
make the spatially compatible response.
A striking difference in our findings for children and adults
was that while RT was unquestionably a more sensitive mea-
sure than percentage of correct responses for adults, the latter
was often the more sensitive measure for children, especially
younger children. For example, for our youngest children (4-6
years of age). age-related improvements in each of the three
conditions of the Dots task and in each of the two conditions
of our Abstract Shapes task were far more evident in accuracy
than in speed. Age-related improvements in the ability to inhibit
spatially compatible responses were far more evident in reduced
accuracy differences between Congruent and Incongruent trials
over age than in reduced RT differences in each of the tasks that
tested this (Pictures, Arrows, and Dots; see Fig. 1 I). Similarly,
age-related improvements in the ability to hold multiple items in
mind were far more evident in the reduced change in accuracy
over age for holding six rather than two arbitrary rules in mind
than it was in reduced change in RT (see Fig. 12).
26. Final comments and conclusions
Because we wanted to include very young children, we did
not test our subjects for nearly as many trials as is typically
done in studies of adults. We did not discard the trial following
an error (only error trials), contrary to what is often done in RT
analyses with adult subjects, because with young children error
rates are sufficiently high that to discard the trials immediately
after an error as well as error trials would have resulted in the
loss of too many datapoints. We are impressed, however, with the
consistency of our results with those of other published studies
despite procedural differences.
Certainly there are a number of unanswered questions that
could fruitfully be followed up in later studies. We stopped
testing children at 13 years of age, but on a number of our mea-
sures children of 13 were not yet performing at adult levels.
Older children should be tested to better understand the devel-
opmental progression between 13 and 26 years. We will test our
Simon task (the Pictures task) without the posted memory aids
to see how much our having removed the usual memory demand
present in most Simon tasks affected results with our paradigm
in children. Arrows may be a more compelling symbol for adults
than children, so we will re-administer that condition using eyes
looking straight down or diagonally to the other side. It is likely
that adults reduced the separate rules for vertical and diagonal
Arrows to one rule ("Press where the arrow is pointing") but
that children did not spontaneously do that. We will see what
effect explicitly instructing children to code this as one rule has
on their performance. Some of our adults had a little difficulty
distinguishing the gray and striped Dots. We will therefore use
stimuli of different shapes (hearts and flowers) in future testing.
Among the most important additional work to be done is to
complement the work of O'Craven, Davidson, Bergida, Savoy
and Diamond (in preparation) on the neural systems recruited
for performance of the various conditions tested here in adults
with neuroimaging studies of the neural systems recruited by
children in performance of these conditions and how, and why,
that changes over age. Certainly there are important functional
and structural changes in the neural network recruited for cog-
nitive control and executive functions throughout the age range
investigated here (Diamond, 2002). Functional changes in the
neural basis for cognitive control appear to be characterized by
increasingly focal activation during early childhood and then
decreasingly intense activation of the focal regions during ado-
lescence (e.g., Brown et al., 2005; Casey, Galvan, & Hare, 2005;
Durston et al., 2005).
Besides characterizing effects (such as local switch costs,
global switch costs, and asymmetric switch costs), previously
studied only in older children or adults, in young children and
throughout a wide age span, some of the most important findings
to come out of this study include the following:
Inhibiting the tendency to make a spatially compatible
response exacted a greater toll on young children's performance
than did memory demands and than it did on older partici-
pants' performance. The spatial incompatibility effect (the cost
of inhibiting the pull to respond on the same side as the stimu-
lus) was greater the younger the participant. Even at 13 years of
age, children still showed a greater Simon effect than did young
adults.
Inhibitory control was sufficiently problematic for very
young children that they took especially long on all trials requir-
ing inhibition (Incongruent trials and switch trials) and those
effects were additive. Thus, they responded slower when switch-
ing to the Incongruent rule than the Congruent one; opposite to
the pattern seen in adults. Intermediate-age children, who were
beginning to exercise better inhibitory control, exerted more
effort to do that than older children and adults and so showed a
heightened cost to undoing that inhibition (a more exaggerated
version of the asymmetric switch costs seen in adults and older
children here and reported in the literature for adults).
As inhibitory control improved with age, memory demands
started to exact a greater cost than inhibitory ones. Beginning
at 10 years of age, increased memory demands (holding of six
versus two arbitrary, hard-to-verbalize rules) took a greater toll
on accuracy than did consistently inhibiting the tendency to
respond on the same side as the stimulus (Dots-Incongruent ver-
sus Dots-Congruent)--the opposite of the pattern observed in
the youngest children. Also in line with the greater role of mem-
ory in what is demanding for adults, taxing cognitive flexibility
and inhibition in a switching context was not that hard for adults
EFTA01098914
2074
MC. Davidson et at / Neuropsychologia 44 (2006) 2037-2078
if memory demands were minimal. Unlike the case for children
of all ages in our study, the Arrows test was easy for adults.
Given that we hypothesized that working memory and inhi-
bition are independent, we had predicted that performance on
tasks that tax primarily memory or primarily inhibition would
not be highly correlated. We were wrong. When matched for dif-
ficulty, these tasks were very highly correlated for RT (0.7-0.8)
and respectably correlated for accuracy (0.3-0.4).
Cognitive flexibility (switching between rules), even with
memory demands minimized, showed a long developmental pro-
gression. On the Arrows test, where little or no memory was
required since the stimulus pointed to the correct response, even
by 13 years, children were not yet performing at adult levels.
Global switch costs were among the strongest effects found in
this study. It is not that participants forgot the rules when they
had to hold both the Congruent and Incongruent rules in mind
for the Mixed block. The problem seemed to be in quickly trans-
lating the rules into the correct response.
The most difficult condition at all ages was the one that taxed
inhibition and memory in a switching context (Dots-Mixed). At
every age, holding two superordinate rules in mind and switching
randomly between the rule for making a prepotent response and
the rule for inhibiting that to make the opposite response (Dots-
Mixed) was harder even than holding six arbitrary rules in mind
for stimuli that did not easily lend themselves to verbal labels
(six-Abstract-Shapes).
The speed-accuracy tradeoff changed over age. Across con-
ditions, older participants slowed down on more difficult trials
to preserve their accuracy. Thus they showed large response
time differences and small accuracy differences. Younger chil-
dren often showed less of a change in speed and but very large
differences in accuracy. Young children were often too impul-
sive to take the time they needed; their response speed remained
more constant across conditions, but at the cost of accuracy on
the more difficult conditions. Thus, for example, global switch
costs in accuracy declined over age, but global switch costs in
RT increased over age.
Effects elicited only in Mixed blocks with adults were found
in young children even in single-task blocks. While young chil-
dren could exercise inhibition in steady state, it was sufficiently
difficult for them that it exacted a cost not seen in adults. Adults
(but not young children) seemed to re-set their default response
when inhibition of the same tendency was required throughout a
block. Adults required having to switch between the two condi-
tions for a significant effect on their performance to be evident.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of this work
by NIH. Grant #R01-HD35453 from NICHD funded the empir-
ical work and grant 0ROI-DA 19685 from NIDA funded prepa-
ration of the manuscript. Sarah Munro and Cecil Chau helped
greatly with the figure preparation. The authors would also like
to acknowledge their gratitude to Robert Proctor and two anony-
mous reviewers for comments on an earlier draft, and to all the
parents and children who made this research possible. Reprint
requests should be addressed to: Adele Diamond, UBC, Dept of
Psychiatry, 2255 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T
2A1, or via email:
[email protected].
References
Allpon. A.. Styles. E. A.. & Hsieh. S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Explor-
ing the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.).
Attention and perfonnance XV (pp. 421-452). Cambridge. MA: MIT
Press.
Allpon. A.. & Wylie. G. (2000). Task switching. stimulus-response bindings.
and negative priming. In S. Monett & J. Driver (Eds.). Comm! of cogni-
tive processes: Attention and performance XVI! (pp. 35-70). Cambridge.
MA: MIT Press.
Anderson. M. C.. & Spellman. B. A. (1995). On the status of inhibitory
mechanisms in cognition: Memory retrieval as a model case. Psycholog-
ical Review. 102. 68-100.
Aron. A. R.. Monsell. S.. Sahakian. B. J.. & Robbins. T. W. (2004). A
componential analysis of task-switching deficits associated with lesions
of left and right frontal cortex. Brain. 127. 1561-1573.
Aron. A. R.. Sahakian. B. J.. & Robbins. T. W. (2003). Distractibil-
ity during selection-for-action: Differential deficits in Huntington 's dis-
ease and following frontal lobe damage. Neumpsychologia. 41. 1137-
1147.
Band. G. P.. van der Molen. M. W.. Ovenoom. C. C.. & Verbaten. M.
N. (2000). The ability to activate and inhibit speeded responses: Sepa-
rate developmental trends. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 75.
263-290.
Brass. M.. Derrfuss, J.. Forstmann. B.. & von Cramon. D. Y. (2005). The
role of the inferior frontal junction area in cognitive control. Trends in
Cognitive Science. 9.314-316.
Brass. M.. Ruge. H.. Mciran. N.. Rubin. O.. Koch. I.. Zysset. S.. et al. (2003).
When the same response has different meanings: Recoding the response
meaning in the lateral prefrontal cortex. Neuroimage. 20. 1026-1031.
Braver. T. S.. Reynolds. J. R.. & Donaldson. I). I. (2003). Neural mechanisms
of transient and sustained cognitive control during task switching. Neuron.
39. 713-726.
Brown. A. L. (1975). The development of memory: Knowing, knowing about
knowing. and knowing how to know. In H. W. Reese (Ed.). Advances
in child development and behavior.• 10. (10. (pp. 103-152). New York:
Academic Press.
Brown. R. G.. & Marsden. C. D. (1988). An investigation of the phenomenon
of "set' in Parkinson's disease. Movement Disorders. 3. 152-161.
Brown. T T.. Lugar. H. M.. Coalson. R. S.. Miczin. F. M.. Petersen. S. E..
& Schlaggar. B. L (2005). Developmental changes in human cerebral
functional organization for word generation. Cerebral Cortex. 15. 275-
290.
Bush. G.. Shin. L. M.. Holmes. J.. Rosen. B. R.. & Vogl B. A. (2003). The
multi-source interference task: Validation study with fMRI in individual
subjects. Molecular Psychiatry. 8. 60-70.
Campione. J. C.. & Brown. A. L (1974). The effects of contextual changes
and degree of component mastery on transfer of training. Advances in
Child Development and Behavior. 9.69-114.
Casey. B. J.. Galvan. A.. & Hare. T. A.(2005). Changes in cerebral functional
organization during cognitive development. Current Opinion in Neurobi-
ology. 15. 239-244.
Cepeda. N. J.. Kramer. A. F.. & Gonzalez de Sather. J. C. (2001). Changes
in executive control across the life span: Examination of task-switching
performance. Developmental Psychology. 37. 715-730.
Cohen. J. D.. Dunbar. K.. & McClelland. J. L. (1990). On the control of auto-
matic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop
effect. Psychological Review. 97.332-361.
Cohen. S.. Bixenman. M.. Melilla. N.. & Diamond. A. (2001). Task switching
in children. In Proceedings of the paper presented at the South Carolina
Bicentennial Symposium on Attention.
Craft. J. L.. & Simon. J. R. (1970). Processing symbolic information from a
visual display: Interference from an irrelevant directional cue. Journal of
Experimental Psychology. 83. 415-420.
EFTA01098915
MC. Davidson et al. / Neuropsychologia 44 (2006)2037-2078
2075
Crone. E. A.. Bungc. S. A.. Van der Molen. M. W.. & Ridderinkhof. K.
R. (in press). Switching between tasks and responses: A developmental
study. Developmental Science.
Crone. E. A.. Ridderinkhof. R. K.. Worm. M.. Somsen. R. J. M.. & van
der Molen. M. W. (2004). Switching between spatial stimulus-response
mappings: A developmental study of cognitive flexibility•. Developmental
Science. 7.443-455.
Crone. E. A.. Wendelken. C.. Donohue. S. E.. & Bunge. S. A. (2005). Neural
evidence for dissociable components of task-switching. Cerebral Cortex
(July 6 Epub ahead of print).
Dassonville. R. Lewis. S. M.. Zhu. X. H.. Ugurbil. K.. Kim. S. G.. & Ashe.
J. (2001). The effect of stimulus—response compatibility on cortical motor
activation. NeumImage. 131. 1-14.
De Jong. R. (1995). Strategical determinants of compatibility effects with
task uncertainty. Acta Psychologica. 88. 187-207.
DeLuca. C.. Wood. S. J.. Anderson. V.. Buchanan. J. A.. Proffitt. T.. Mahony.
K.. et al. (2003). Normative data from CANTAB: Development of exec-
utive function over the lifespan. Journal of Clinical and Experimental
Neuropsychology. 25. 242-254.
Dempster. F. N. (1985). Short-term memory development in childhood and
adolescence. In C. J. Brainerd & M. Pressley (Eds.). Basic processes in
memory development• Progress in cognitive development research. New
York: Springer—Verlag.
Diamond. A. (1990). The development and neural bases of higher cognitive
functions. NY: New York Academy of Sciences.
Diamond. A. (1991). Neuropsychological insights into the meaning of object
concept development. In S. Carey & R. Gelman (Eds.). The epigenesis
of mind: Essays on biology and knowledge (pp. 67-110). Hillsdale. NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Diamond. A. (1995). Evidence of robust recognition memory early in life
even when assessed by reaching behavior. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology. 59.419-456.
Diamond. A. (2002). Normal development of prefrontal cortex from birth to
young adulthood: Cognitive functions. anatomy, and biochemistry. In D.
T. Stuss & R. T. Knight (Eds.). Principles of frontal lobe fr action (pp.
466-503). London. UK: Oxford University Press.
Diamond. A. (2005). Some generalizations concerning cognition and cog-
nitive development. Presented to the Psychology Dept.. University• of
Victoria. October 27.2005.
Diamond. A. A theory of "all or none:' In preparation.
Diamond. A.. Carlson. S. M.. & Beck. D. M. (2005). Preschool children's
performance in task switching on the dimensional change card sort task:
Separating the dimensions aids the ability to switch. Developmental Neu-
mpsychology. 28. 689-729.
Diamond. A.. Kirkham. N. Z.. & Amso. D. (2002). Conditions under which
young children CAN hold two rules in mind and inhibit a prcpotent
response. Developmental Psychology. 38. 352-362.
I>iamond. A.. Otraven. K. M.. & Savoy. R. L. (1998). Dorsolateral pre-
frontal cortex contributions to working memory and inhibition as revealed
by fMRI. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts. 24. 1251.
Diedrichsen. J.. Mayr. IJ.. Dhaliwal. H.. Keck. S.. & Ivry. R. B. (2000).
Task-switching deficits in patients with prefrontal lesions or Parkinson's
disease. Cognitive Neuroscience Society Annual Meeting Abstracts. I.
99.
DiGirolamo. G. J.. Kramer. A. F.. Barad. B.. Cepeda. N. J.. Weiss-
man. D. H.. Milham. M. P.. et al. (2001). General and task-
specific frontal lobe recruitment in older adults during executive pro-
crews: A IMRI investigation of task-switching. Neurorepon. 12. 2065-
2071.
Doan. H. M.. & Cooper. D. L. (1971). Conditional discrimination in children:
Two relevant factors. Child Development. 42. 209-220.
Dove. A.. Pollmann. S.. Schubert, T.. Wiggins. C. J.. @ von Cramon. Y. D.
(2000). Prefrontal cortex activation in task switching: An event-related
fNIRI study. Cognitive Brain Research. 9. 103-109.
Downes. J. J.. Roberts. A. C.. Sahakian. B. J.. Evenden. J. L.. Mortis. R. G..
& Robbins. T. W. (1989). Impaired extra-dimensional shift performance in
medicated and unmedicated Paikinson's disease: Evidence for a specific
attentional dysfunction. Neuropsyrhologia. 27. 1329-1343.
Dreher. J.. & Berman. F. K. (2002). Fractionating the neural substrate of
cognitive control processes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci-
ences. 99. 14595-14600.
Dreher. J. C.. & Grafman. J. (2003). Dissociating the roles of the rosual
anterior cingulate and the lateral prefrontal cortices in performing two
tasks simultaneously or successively. Cerebral Cortex. 13. 329-339.
Dunton. S.. Fossella. J. A.. Casey. B. J.. Hulshoff Pol. H. E.. Galvan. A..
Schnack. H. G.. et al. (2005). Differential effects of DRD4 and DATI
genotype on fronto-striatal gray matter volumes in a sample of subjects
with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. their unaffected siblings, and
controls. Molecular Psychiatry. 10. 678-685.
Fagot. C. (1994). Chronometric investigations of task switching. Ph.D. Thesis.
University of California. San Diego.
Fan. J.. Flombaum. J. 1.. McCandliss, B. D.. Thomas. K. NI.. & Posner. M.
1.(2003). Cognitive and brain consequences of conflict. Neurolmage. 18.
42-57.
Fischer. B.. Biscaldi. M.. & Gerack. S. (1997). On the development of vol-
untary and reflexive components in human saccade generation. Brain
Research. 754. 285-297.
Fitts. P. M.. & Seger. C. M. (1953). S-R compatibility: Spatial characteristics
of stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 81.
174-176.
Flowers. K. A.. & Robertson. C. (1985). The effect of Paticinson's disease on
the ability to maintain a mental set. Journal of Neurology Neumsurgery
and Psychiatry. 48. 517-529.
Georgopoulos. A. (1994). Population activity in the control of movement.
International Review of Neurobiology. 37. 103-119.
Georgopoulos• A. P.. Lurito. J. T.. Petrides, M.. Schwartz. A. B.. & Massey.
J. T. (1989). Mental rotation of the neuronal population vector. Science.
243. 234-236.
Gerardi-Coulton. G. (2.(X10). Sensitivity to spatial conflict and the develop-
ment of self-regulation in children 24-36 months of age. Developmental
Science. 3. 397-404.
Gemsbacher. M. A.. & Faust. M. E. (1991). The mechanism of suppression:
A component of general comprehension skill. Journal of Experimental
Psychology. 17. 245-262.
Gerstadt. C.. Hong. Y.. & Diamond. A. (1994). The relationship between
cognition and action: Performance of 3 112-7 year old children on a
Stroop-like day-night tat. Cognition. 53. 129-153.
Goldman-Rakic. P. S. (1987). Circuitry of primate prefrontal cortex and
regulation of behavior by representational memory. In F. Plum (Ed.).
Handbook of physiology: V. (V. (pp. 373-417). Bethesda. MD: American
Physiological Society.
Gollin. E. S. (1964). Reversal learning and conditional discrimination in
children. Journal of Comparative & Physiological Psychology. 58. 441-
445.
Gollin. E. S. (1965). Factors affecting conditional discrimination in children.
Journal of Comparative and Physiological Pyschology, 60. 422-427.
Gollin. E. S. (1966). Solution of conditional discrimination problems by
young children. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology.
62. 454-456.
Gollin. E. S.. & Liss. P. (1962). Conditional discrimination in children. Jour-
nal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology. 55.850-855.
Hamishfeger. K. K.. & Pope. R. S. (1996). Intending to forget: The devel-
opment of cognitive inhibition in directed forgetting. Journal of Experi-
mental Child Psychology. 62. 292-3I5.
Hasher. L.. Stoltzfus. E. R.. Zacks. R. T.. & Rypma. B. (1991). Age and
inhibition. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 17. 163-169.
Hanby. J. V.. Petit. L.. Ungerleider. L G.. & Courtney. S. M. (2000). Dis-
tinguishing the functional roles of multiple regions in distributed neural
systems for visual working memory. Neuroimage. It 380-391.
Hayes, A. E.. Davidson. M. C.. Keefe. S. W.. & Real. R. D. (1998). Toward
a functional analysis of the basal ganglia. Journal of Cognitive Neuro-
science. 10. 178-198.
Hedge. A.. & Marsh. N. W. A. (1975). The effect of irrelevant spatial corre-
spondence on two-choice response-time. Acta Psychologica. 39.427
39.
Heidbreder. E. F. (1928). Problem solving in children and adults. Journal of
Genetic Psychology. 35. 522-545.
EFTA01098916
2076
.41.C. Davidson et al. / Neuropsychologia -14 (2006)2037-2078
Hommel. B. (1993). The relationship between stimulus processing and
response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap.
Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 55. 280-290.
Hommel. B. (1994). Effects of irrelevant spatial S compatibility depend on
stimulus complexity. Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,
56. 179-184.
Hommel. B. (1995). Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect:
Toward an empirical clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance. 21. 764-775.
Hommel. B., Musseler. J.. Aschersleben. G.. & Prinz. W. (2001). The Theory
of Event Coding (TEC): a framework for perception and action planning.
Behavioral & Brain Sciences. 24(5). 849478.
Hommel. B.. Proctor. R. W.. & Vu. K. P. (2004). A feature-integration account
of sequential effects in the Simon task. Psychological Research. 68.1-17.
lacoboni. M.. Woods. R. P.. & Mazziotta. J. C. (1998). Bimodal (auditory
and visual) le0 frontoparietal circuitry for sensorimotor integration and
sensorimotor learning. Brain. 121. 2135-2143. Pt
Jeffrey. W. E. (1961). Variables in early discrimination learning. III. Simul-
taneous vs. successive stimulus presentation. Child Development. 32.
305-310.
Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Ps)rhology. 89. 542.
Kail. R. (1991a). Development of processing speed in childhood and adoles-
cence. In H. W. Reese (Ed.). Advances in child development and behavior:
23. (23. (pp. 151-185). New York: Academic Press.
Kail. R. (19916). Developmental change in speed of processing during child-
hood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin. 109. 490-501.
Kail. R. (1991c). Processing time declines exponentially during childhood
and adolescence. Developmental Psychology. 27. 259-266.
Kail. R.. & Salthouse. T. A. (1994). Processing speed as a mental capacity.
Acta Psychologica. 86. 199-225.
Kecle. S.. & Rafal. R. (2000). Deficits of task set in patients with k0
prefrontal cortex lesions. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.). Control
of cognitive processes: Attention and performance: XVIII. (XVIII. (pp.
627-652). Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
Kimberg. D. Y.. Aguirre. G. K.. & D'Esposito. M. (2000). Modulation of
task-related neural activity in task-switching: An IMRI study. Cognitive
Brain Research. 10. 189-196.
Kimberg. D. Y.. & Farah. M. J. (1993). A unified account of cognitive
impairments following frontal lobe damage: The role of working memory
in complex. organized behavior. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 122.
411-428.
Kirkham. N. K.. Cruess. L.. & Diamond. A. (2003). Helping children apply
their knowledge to their behavior on a dimension-switching task. Devel-
opmental Science. 6(5). 449-476.
Kleinsorge. T. (1999). Response repetition benefits and costs. Acta Psycho-
logien. 103. 295-310.
Kleinsorge. T.. & Heuer. H. (1999). Hierarchical switching in a multi-
dimensional task space. Psychological Research. 62.300-312.
Kramer. A. F.. Hahn. S.. & Gopher. D. (1999). Task coordination and
aging: Explorations of executive control processes in the tack switching
paradigm. Acta Psychologica. 101. 339-378.
Kray. J.. Eber. J.. & Lindenberger. U. (2004). Age differences in executive
functioning across the lifespan: The role of verbalization in task prepa-
ration. Acta Psychologica. 115. 143-165.
Kray. J.. Li. K. Z.. & Lindenberger. U. (2002). Age-related changes in task-
switching components: The role of task uncertainty. Brain and Cognition.
49. 363-381.
Kray. J.. & Lindenberger. U. (2000). Adult age differences in task switching.
Psychology and Aging. 15. 126-147.
Levy. R.. & Goldman-Rakic. P. S. (2000). Segregation of working memory
functions within the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Experimental Brain
Research. /33.23-32.
Logan. G. D.. & Zbrodoff. N. J. (1979). When it helps to be misled: Facil-
itative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a
Stroop-like task. Memory & Cognition. 7. 166-174.
Los. S. A. (1996). On the origin of mixing costs: Exploring information
processing in pure and Mixed blocks of trials. Acta Psychologica. 94.
145-188.
Los. S. A. (1999). Identifying stimuli of different perceptual categories in
pure and Mixed blocks of trials: Evidence for stimulus-driven switch
costs. Acta Ps)rhologica, 103. 173-205.
Liu. X.. Banich. M. T. Jacobson. B. L.. & Tanabe. J. L 42004). Common
and distinct neural substrates of attentional control in an integrated Simon
and spatial Swoop task as assessed by event-related fMR1. Net:mintage.
22. 1097-1106.
Lu. C. H.. & Proctor. R. W (1995). The influence of irrelevant location
information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop
effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 2. 174-207.
Luciana. M.. Conklin. H. NI., Hooper. C. J.. & Yager. R. S. (2005). The
development of nonverbal working memory and executive control pro-
cesses in adolescents. Child Development. 76.697-712.
Luciana. NI., & Nelson. C. A. (2002). Assessment of neuropsychological
function in children using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Testing
Automated Battery (CANTAB): Performance in 4 to 12 year-olds. Devel-
opmental Neumpsychology. 22. 595-623.
Luna. B.. Garver. K. E.. Urban. T. A.. Lazar. N. A.. & Sweeney. J. A. (2004).
Maturation of cognitive processes from late childhood to adulthood. Child
Development. 75. 1357-1372.
Lyons-Warren. A.. Lillie. R.. & Hershey. T. 42004). Short and long-term
spatial delayed response performance across the lifespan. Detrlopmental
Neuropsychology. 26. 661-678.
Maclin. E. L.. Gratton. G.. & Fabiani. M. (2001). Visual spatial localization
conflict: An fivIRI study. Neuroreport. 12. 3633-3636.
Mayr. U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence
for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Afentory. and Cognition. 22.
350-364.
Map. U. (2001). Age differences in the selection of mental sets: The role of
inhibition, stimulus ambiguity. and response-set overlap. Psychology and
Aging. 16. 96-109.
Map. U.. & Klieg'. R. (2000a). Complex semantic processing in old age:
Does it May or does it go? Psychology and Aging• 15. 2943.
Map. U.. & Klieg'. R. (200Ob). Task-set switching and long-term memory
retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory. and
Cognition. 26. 1124-1140.
Mayr. U.. & Liebscher. T. (2001). Is there an age deficit in the selection of
mental sets? European Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 13. 47-69.
Mecklinger. A.. & Mueller. N. (1996). Dissociations in the processing of
"what" and "where" information in working memory: An event-related
potential analysis. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 8. 453-473.
Mecklinger. A. D.. von Cramon, D. Y.. Springer. A.. & Matthes-von Cramon.
G. (1999). Executive control functions in task switching: Evidence from
brain injured patients. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsy-
chology, 21. 606-6I9.
Mciran. N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task per-
formance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning. Memory. and
Cognition. 22. 1423-1442.
Mciran. N. (2000a). Modeling cognitive control in task-switching. Psycho-
logical Research. 63.234-249.
Mciran. N. (20006). Reconfiguration of stimulus task-sets and response task-
sets during task-switching. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.). Control
of cognitive processes: Attention and performance: XVIII. (XVIII. (pp.
377-400). Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
Mciran. N. (2005). Task rule congruency and Simon-like effects in switching
between spatial tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A.
58. 1023-1041.
Martin. N.. Gotkr. A.. & Perlman. A. (1996). Old age is associated with
pattern of relatively intact and relatively impaired task-set switching abil-
ities. Journals of Gerontology Series 8-Psychological Sciences and Social
Sciences. 5642). P88-P102.
Martin. N.. Chary. L. & Sapir. A. (2000). Component processes in task
switching. Cognitive Psychokgy. 41. 211-253.
Martin. N.. Gotkr. A.. & Perlman. A. (2001). Old age is associated with
a pattern of relatively intact and relatively impaired task-set switching
abilities. Journals of Gerontology:• Series B: Psychological Sciences &
Social Sciences B. 56. 88-102.
EFTA01098917
MC. Davidson et al. / Neurapsychologia 44 (2006) 2037-2078
2077
Meiran, N.. Levine. J.. Mciran. N.. @ Henik. A. (2000). Task-set switching
in schizophrenia. Neumpsychology. 14. 471-482.
Meyer. D. E.. Evans. J. E.. Lauber. E. J.. & Gmeindl. L. (1998). The role of
dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for executive processes in task switching.
Cognitive Neuroscience Society Annual Meeting Abstracts.
Miller. E. K.. & Cohen. J. D. (2001). An integrative theory of prefrontal
cortex function. Annual Review of Neuroscience. 24. 167-202.
Miyake. A.. Freidman. N. P.. Emerson. M. J.. Witzki. A. H.. Howener. A..
& Wager. T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions
and their contributions to complex "frontal lobe" tasks: A latent variable
analysis. Cognitive Psychology. 41. 49-100.
Monsell. S.. & Driver. J. (Eds.). (2000). Control of cognitive processes: Atten-
tion and performance: XVIII. (XVIII.. Cambridge. MA: MIT Press.
Morton. J. B.. & Munakata. Y. (2002). Are you listening? Exploring a devel-
opmental knowledge action dissociation in a speech interpretation task.
Developmental Science. 5.435 140.
Munakata. Y. (2000). Challenges to the violation of expectation paradigm:
Throwing the conceptual baby out with thc perceptual processing bath-
water? Infancy. 1. 471-477.
Munoz. D.. Broughton. J.. Goldring. J.. & Armstrong. I. (1998). Age-related
perfomunce of human subjects on saccadic eye movement tasks. Exper-
imental Brain Research, 217. 1-10.
O'Craven. K. M.. Davidson. M. C.. Bergida. R.. Savoy. R. L. Diamond. A.
(in preparation). Prefrontal cortex contributions to working memory and
inhibition as revealed by IMRE
O'Craven. K. M.. Savoy. R. L.. & Diamond. A. (1998). Working memory and
inhibition in dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. In Proceedings of the Human
Brain Mapping Annual Meeting.
Omori. M.. Yamada. H.. Murata. T.. Sadao. N.. Tanaka. M.. Ishii.
Y.. et al. (1999). Neuronal substrates participating in attentional set-
shifting of rules for visual guided motor selection: A functional mag-
netic resonance imaging investigation. Neuroscience Research, 33. 317-
323.
Osier. S. F.. & 1Cofsky. E. (1965). Stimulus uncertainty as a variable in
the development of conceptual ability. Journal of Experimental Child
Psychology. 2. 264-279.
Owen. A. NI.. Roberts. A. C.. Hodges, J. R.. Summers. B. A.. Polkey. C. E..
& Robbins. T. W. (1993). Contrasting mechanisms of impaired attentional
set shifting in patients with frontal lobe damage or Parkinson's disease.
Brain. 116. [159-1175.
Peterson. B. S.. Kane. M. J.. Alexander. G. M.. Lacadic. C.. Skudlarski.
R. Leung. H. C.. et al. (2002). An event-related functional MRI study
comparing interference effects in the Simon and Snoop tasks. Cognitive
Brain Research. 13. 427-440.
Praanistra. P.. Kleine. B. U.. & Schnirzler. A. (1999). Magnetic stimulation
of the dorsal premotor cortex modulates the Simon effect. NeumReport.
10. 3671-3674.
Proctor. R. W.. & Vu. K.-P. L (2002). Mixing location-irrelevant and location-
relevant trials: Influence of stimulus mode on spatial compatibility effects.
Memory & Cognition. 30. 281-293.
Reimers. S.. & Maylor. E. A. (2005). 'Risk switching across the life span:
Effects of age on general and specific switch costs. Developmental Psy-
chology. 41. 661-671.
Ridderinkhof. K. R. (2002). Activation and suppression in conflict tasks:
Empirical classification through distributional analyses. In W. Prinz &
B. Hommel (Eds.). Attention and performance XIX: Common mecha-
nisms in perception and action (pp. 494-519). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Rogers. R. D.. & Monsell. S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between
simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
124. 207-231.
Rogers. R. D.. Sahakian. B. J.. Hodges. J. R.. Polkey. C. E.. Kennard. C..
& Robbins. T. W. (1998). Dissociating executive mechanisms of task
control following frontal lobe damage and Parkinson's disease. Brain.
121. 815-842.
Salthouse. T. A.. Fristoe. N. M.. Linewcaver. T. T., & Coon. V. E. (1995).
Aging of attention: Does the ability to divide decline? Memory and Cog-
nition. 23. 56-71.
Schuch. S.. & Koch. I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition
of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human
Perception & Performance. 29. 92-105.
Schuch. S.. & Koch. I. (2004). The costs of changing the representation of
action: Response repetition and response-response compatibility in dual
tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Per-
formance. 30. 566-582.
Shaffer. L. H. (1965). Choice reaction with variable S—R mapping. Journal
of Experimental Psychology. 70. 284-288.
Shallicc. T.. & Burgess. P. W. (1991). Higher-order cognitive impairments
and frontal lobe lesions in man. In H. S. Levin. H. NI. Eisenberg. & A.
L Benton (Eds.). Frontal lobe function and dysfunction (pp. 125-138).
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Shepard. W. 0. (1957). Learning set in preschool children. Journal of Com-
parative & Physiological Psychology. 50. 15-17.
Simon. F. R.. & Small. A. M. (1969). Processing auditory irrelevant informa-
tion: Interference from an irrelevant cue. Journal of Applied Psychology.
53. 433-435.
Simon. J. R. (1990). The effects of an irrelevant directional cue on
human information processing. In R. W. Proctor & T G. Reeve (Eds.).
Stimulus-response compatibility,: An integrated perspective (pp. 31-86).
Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Simon. J. R.. & !terbium K. (1990). Effect of conflicting cues on information
processing: the 'Stroop effect' vs. the 'Simon effect. Acta Psychologica.
73(2). 159-170.
Sohn. M. H.. Ursa S., Anderson. J. R.. Stenger. V. A.. & Carter. C. S. 42000).
Inaugural article: The role of prefrontal cortex and posterior parietal cor-
tex in task switching. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
97. 13448-13453.
Spector. A.. & Biederman. 1. (1976). Mental set and mental shift revisited.
American Journal of Psychology. 89. 669-679.
Stoffels. E. 1. (1996). Uncertainty and processing routes in the selection of
a response: an S-R compatibility study. Acta Psychologica. 94(2). 227-
252.
Stunner. B., Leuthold, H.. Soetens. E.. SchrSter. H.. & Sommer. W. (2002).
Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task: Behav-
ioral and ekctrophysiological evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychol-
ogy: Human Perception & Performance. 28. 1345-1363.
Sudevan. P.. & Taylor. D. A. (1987). The cueing and priming of cognitive
operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance. 13. 89-103.
Sylvester. C. C.. Wager. T D.. Lacey. S. C.. Hernandez. L.. Nichols. T. E.
Smith. E. E.. et al. (2003). Switching attention and resolving interfer-
ence: IMR1 measures of executive functions. Neumpsyrhologia. 41. 357-
370.
Tagliabue. M.. Zorzi. M.. Unlit/. C.. & Bassignani. F. (2000). The role
of long-term-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect.
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor-
mance. 26. 648-670.
Thomas. K. M.. King. S. W.. Frozen. P. I.. Welsh, T. F.• Berkowitz. A. L.
Noll. D. C.. et al. (1999). A developmental functional MRI study of
spatial working memory. Neumlmage. 10. 327-338.
Usher. M.. @ McClelland. J. L. (2001). The time course of perceptual choice:
The leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychological Review. 108.
550-592.
Usher. NI.. Olami. Z.. & McClelland. J. L. (2002). Hick's law in a stochas-
tic race model with speed-accuracy tradeoff. Journal of Mathematical
Psychology. 46. 704-715.
Valle-Inclfin. F. (1996). The locus of interference in the Simon effect: An
ERP study. Biological Psychology. 43. 147-162.
Valle-Inclan. E. Hackley. S. A.. & de Labra. C. (2002). Does stimulus-
driven response activation underlie the Simon effect? In W. Prinz &
B. Hommel (Eds.). Attention and performance XIX: Common mecha-
nisms in perception and action (pp. 474-493). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
van Asselen. M.. & Ridderinkhof. K. R. (2000). Shift costs of predictable and
unexpected set shifting in young and older adults. Psychologica Belgica.
40. 259-273.
EFTA01098918
2078
RC Davidson et at / Neuropsychologia 44 (20(16)2037-2078
Verbruggen. F. R.. Licfooghe. B.. Szmalec. A.. & Vandicrendonck. A. (2005).
Inhibiting responses when switching: Does it matter? Experimental Psy-
chology. 52. 125-130.
Verhaeghen. P., & Dc Mcersman. L. (1998). Aging and the Swoop effect: A
meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging. 13. 120-126.
Verhaeghen. P.. & Salthousc. T. A. (1997). Meta-analyses of age-cognition
relations in adulthood: Estimates of linear and nonlinear age effects and
structural models. Psychological Bulletin. 122. 231-249.
Vu. K.-P. L.. & Proctor. R. W. (2004). Mixing compatible and incompatible
mappings: Elimination. reduction. and enhancement of spatial compati-
bility effects. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human
Experimental Psychology. 57.539-556.
Wager. T. D.. Reading. S.. & lonides. J. (2004). Neuroimaging studies of
shifting attention: A meta-analysis. Nearolmage. 22. 1679-1693.
Wager. T. D.. & Smith. E. E (2003). Neuroimaging studies of working mem-
ory: A meta-analysis. Cognitive. Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience.
3. 255-274.
Waschcr. E. Schatz. U.. Kudcr. T.. @ Verleger. R. (200O. Validity and bound-
ary conditions of automatic response activation in the Simon task. Journal
of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Mfonnance. 27.
731-751.
Wascher. E.. & Wolber. M. (2004). Attentional and intentional cueing
in a Simon task: An EEC-based approach. Psychological Research/
Psychologische Forschung. 68. 18-30.
Wasiak. E. Hommel. B.. & Allport. A. (2003). Task-switching and long-
term priming: Role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs.
Cognitive Psychology. 46.361
13.
Wiegand. K.. & Wascher. E. (2005). Dynamic aspects of stimulus—response
correspondence: Evidence for two mechanisms involved in the Simon
Effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Per-
formance. 31. 453-464.
Wiihr. P. (2004). Sequential modulation of logical-recoding operations in the
Simon task. Experimental Psychology. 58A. 705-731.
Wiihr. P. (2005). Evidence for gating of direct response activation in the
Simon task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 12. 282-288.
Wylie. G.. & Allpod. A. (2000). Task switching and the measurement of
"switch costs". Psychology Research. 63. 2I2-233.
Yeung. N.. @ Mansell. S. (2003). The effects of recent practice on task
switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
Performance. 29. 9I9-936.
Zelazo. P. D.. Craik. F. 1. M.. & Booth. L. (2004). Executive function across
the life span. Acta Psychologica. 115. 167-183.
EFTA01098919