To switch or to repeat? Commonalities and differences in the electrophysiological correlates of preparation for voluntary and forced task choices.

When switching tasks in the laboratory, either the experimenter or the participant can decide which task comes next. So far, this kind of forced and voluntary task switching is usually investigated in isolation. However, in our everyday life, switching between different tasks and goals often depends both on current situational demands and on our intentions. While research has mainly focused on differences between forced and voluntary switching, it is still unclear whether, and if so, which neural processes are shared between both switch types. To identify these, we compared electrophysiological preparatory activity in blocks of randomly intermixed voluntary and forced task-switching trials. We further manipulated the forced switch rate (20% vs. 80%) between blocks to de-confound voluntariness with switch frequency and to investigate how switch frequency effects influence preparatory potentials. ERP analysis revealed an enhanced early parietal activity pattern in the P3b time window on voluntary trials, possibly reflecting early traces of a decision process. A later pre-target negativity was enhanced on forced as compared to voluntary trials. Multivariate pattern analyses revealed that a common preparatory activity on both forced and voluntary switch trials can be found in the switch positivity time window, which we interpreted as an index of a common endogenous task preparation process.

The role of objective and subjective effort costs in voluntary task choice.

Human beings tend to avoid effort, if a less effortful option is equally rewarding. However, and in sharp contrast to this claim, we repeatedly found that (a subset of) participants deliberately choose the more difficult of two tasks in a voluntary task switching (VTS) paradigm even though avoidance of the difficult task was allowed (Jurczyk et al., Motivation Science 5:295-313, 2019). In this study, we investigate to what extent the deliberate switch to the difficult task is determined by the actual objective or the subjective effort costs for the difficult task. In two experiments, participants (N = 100, each) first went through several blocks of voluntary task choices between an easy and a difficult task. After that, they worked through an effort discounting paradigm, EDT, (Westbrook et al., PLoS One 8(7):e68210, 2013) that required participants to make a series of iterative choices between re-doing a difficult task block for a fixed amount or an easy task block for a variable (lower) amount of money until the individual indifference point was reached. In Experiment 1, the EDT comprised the same tasks from the VTS, in Experiment 2, EDT used another set of easy vs. difficult tasks. Results showed that the voluntary switch to the difficult task was mostly predicted by the objective performance costs and only marginally be the subjective effort cost. The switch to the difficult task may thus be less irrational than originally thought and at its avoidance at least partially driven by economic considerations.

Keep flexible-Keep switching? Boundary conditions of the influence of forced task switching on voluntary task switching.

Frequent forced switching between tasks has been shown to reduce switch costs and increase voluntary switch rates. So far, however, the boundary conditions of the influence of forced task switching on voluntary task switching are unknown. Thus, the present study was aimed to test different aspects of generalizability (across items, tasks, and time) of switching-induced flexibility established in forced-choice trials on voluntary switching in free-choice trials. To this end, stimuli and tasks were systematically varied between forced- and free-choice trials in a hybrid task-switching paradigm. In a series of three experiments, we manipulated forced-choice switch probability (25% vs. 75%) and found that switching-induced flexibility generalizes to new items, but arguably not to new tasks. This task-specific effect is rather short-lived, limited to the first free-choice trial following a forced-choice trial. Underlying mechanisms of switching-induced flexibility, the versatility of flexibility and implications for the trainability of cognitive flexibility are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Investigating anticipatory processes during sequentially changing reward prospect: An ERP study.

Performance-contingent reward prospect modulates the stability-flexibility balance in voluntary task switching. High reward prospect typically increases stability, indicated by a low voluntary switch rate (VSR). But this effect depends on the immediate reward history: Only when a high reward repeats (reward remains high), stability is increased. In contrast, when reward increases (high reward following low reward) cognitive flexibility is promoted, indicated by a relatively high VSR. To investigate the underlying mechanisms of changing reward expectations during voluntary task choice, we conducted two experiments and measured reward cue-locked event-related potentials (P2, P3b, CNV). The experiments yielded consistent findings: The P2 was stronger in response to high vs. low reward reflecting an early attentional boost by high reward anticipation. The P3b was highest in increase, intermediate in remain-high, and lowest in low reward trials suggesting responsiveness to working memory updating and motivational arousal. Finally, the CNV increased over time and was sensitive to both reward magnitude and sequence with the lowest amplitude in reward remain-low trials suggesting that preparatory control only increases when worth the effort. Taken together, early attentional processes (P2) were boosted by mere reward magnitude, while later processes (P3b, CNV) were sensitive to both reward magnitude and its sequence.