TY - JOUR A1 - Foerster, Anna A1 - Moeller, Birte A1 - Frings, Christian A1 - Pfister, Roland T1 - What is left after an error? Towards a comprehensive account of goal-based binding and retrieval JF - Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics N2 - The cognitive system readily detects and corrects erroneous actions by establishing episodic bindings between representations of the acted upon stimuli and the intended correct response. If these stimuli are encountered again, they trigger the retrieval of the correct response. Thus, binding and retrieval efficiently pave the way for future success. The current study set out to define the role of the erroneous response itself and explicit feedback for the error during these processes of goal-based binding and retrieval. Two experiments showed robust and similar binding and retrieval effects with and without feedback and pointed towards sustained activation of the unbound, erroneous response. The third experiment confirmed that the erroneous response is more readily available than a neutral alternative. Together, the results demonstrate that episodic binding biases future actions toward success, guided primarily through internal feedback processes, while the erroneous response still leaves detectable traces in human action control. KW - error processing KW - episodic binding KW - action control Y1 - 2023 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-324851 VL - 85 IS - 1 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Pfister, Roland A1 - Frings, Christian A1 - Moeller, Birte T1 - The Role of Congruency for Distractor-Response Binding: A Caveat JF - Advances in Cognitive Psychologe N2 - Responding in the presence of stimuli leads to an integration of stimulus features and response features into event fles, which can later be retrieved to assist action control. This integration mechanism is not limited to target stimuli, but can also include distractors (distractor-response binding). A recurring research question is which factors determine whether or not distractors are integrated. One suggested candidate factor is target-distractor congruency: Distractor-response binding effects were reported to be stronger for congruent than for incongruent target-distractor pairs. Here, we discuss a general problem with including the factor of congruency in typical analyses used to study distractor-based binding effects. Integrating this factor leads to a confound that may explain any differences between distractor-response binding effects of congruent and incongruent distractors with a simple congruency effect. Simulation data confrmed this argument. We propose to interpret previous data cautiously and discuss potential avenues to circumvent this problem in the future. KW - action control KW - distractor-response binding KW - congruency sequences KW - sequence analysis Y1 - 2019 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-200265 VL - 15 IS - 2 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Ludwig, Jonas A1 - Dignath, David A1 - Lukas, Sarah T1 - Positive and negative action-effects improve task-switching performance JF - Acta Psychologica N2 - Anticipation of one's own actions' effects drives goal-directed behavior. In multitasking environments, the learning of stable action-effect associations seems particularly important, because establishing reliable response-effect associations for multiple competing tasks may help to differentiate between these tasks and thereby improve task-switching performance. Action-effects not only have cognitive, but also motivational aspects and often the consequences of our actions are hedonically marked. Thus, the anticipated hedonic quality of action-effects may also become part of the task representation, and positive and negative affect may distinctly modulate task-switching performance. We report a pre-registered experiment (N = 120) designed to examine how positive, negative, and neutral valence of action-effects impact performance in a cued task-switching paradigm. Pictures from the IAPS database were used to manipulate the action-effects' valence. Affective valence determined reaction times: participants who learned positive or negative action-effects responded faster than participants in the control condition. In particular, task-switch trials were faster in both conditions than in the control condition, while task-repetition trials were comparable across valence conditions. Our results further suggest that performance improvements in the positive and negative valence conditions occurred for different reasons. Negative action-effects expedited responses specifically for the task that produced the unpleasant outcome, while positive affect more generally promoted performance of both tasks. These findings point toward distinct roles of positive and negative valence of action-effects in regulating multitasking performance. KW - action control KW - multitasking KW - task-switching KW - action-effects KW - affective valence Y1 - 2021 U6 - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-369638 VL - 221 ER -