The bivalency effect in task switching: General and enduring.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the generality and temporal endurance of the bivalency effect in task switching. This effect refers to the slowing on univalent stimuli that occurs when bivalent stimuli appear occasionally. We used a paradigm involving predictable switches between 3 simple tasks, with bivalent stimuli occasionally occurring on one of the tasks. The generality of the bivalency effect was investigated by using different tasks and different types of bivalent stimuli, and the endurance of this effect was investigated across different intertrial intervals (ITIs) and across the univalent trials that followed trials with bivalent stimuli. In 3 experiments, the results showed a general, robust, and enduring bivalency effect for all ITI conditions. Although the effect declined across trials, it remained significant for about 4 trials following one with a bivalent stimulus. Our findings emphasise the importance of top-down processes in task-switching performance.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it