MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972701751 · doi:10.1002/hbm.21488

The Bivalency effect in task switching: Event‐related potentials

2011· article· en· W1972701751 on OpenAlexafffund
John G. Grundy, Miriam F.F. Benarroch, Todd S. Woodward, Paul D. Metzak, Jennifer C. Whitman, Judith M. Shedden

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Canadian institutionsBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHumStimulus (psychology)PsychologyAnterior cingulate cortexNeuroscienceDorsumEvent-related potentialCognitive psychologyAudiologyCognitionBiologyMedicineAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During task switching, if we occasionally encounter stimuli that cue more than one task (i.e., bivalent stimuli), response slowing is observed on all univalent trials within that block, even when no features overlap with the bivalent stimuli. This observation is known as the bivalency effect. Previous fMRI work (Woodward et al., 2008) clearly suggests a role for the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) in the bivalency effect, but the time course remains uncertain. Here, we present the first high-temporal resolution account for the bivalency effect using stimulus-locked event-related potentials. Participants alternated among three simple tasks in six experimental blocks, with bivalent stimuli appearing occasionally in bivalent blocks (blocks 2, 4, and 6). The increased reaction times for univalent stimuli in bivalent blocks demonstrate that these stimuli are being processed differently from univalent stimuli in purely univalent blocks. Frontal electrode sites captured significant amplitude differences associated with the bivalency effect within time windows 100-120 ms, 375-450 ms, and 500-550 ms, which may reflect additional extraction of visual features present in bivalent stimuli (100-120 ms) and suppression of processing carried over from irrelevant cues (375-450 ms and 500-550 ms). Our results support the fMRI findings and provide additional evidence for involvement of the dACC. Furthermore, the bivalency effect dissipated with extended practice both behaviorally and electrophysiologically. These findings are discussed in relation to the differential processing involved in a controlled response style.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.154
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesFrench-language works237,207