Exploring "phasic" vs. "tonic" accounts of the effect of switch probability on the auditory attention switch cost.

Task-switching experiments have shown that the "switch cost" (poorer performance for task switches than for repetitions) is smaller when the probability of a switch is high (e.g., 0.75) than when it is low (e.g., 0.25). Some theoretical accounts explain this effect in terms of top-down control deployed in advance of the task cue ("pre-cue reconfiguration"). We tested such accounts by manipulating the time available before the onset of the cue (the response-cue interval, RCI), reasoning that top-down pre-cue reconfiguration requires time and therefore its effect should increase with RCI. Participants heard a man and a woman simultaneously speaking number words and categorised the number (< 5 vs. > 5) spoken by the voice specified by a pictorial gender-related cue presented at an RCI of 100 ms or 2,200 ms. The target voice switched with a probability of 0.25 or 0.75 (in separate sessions). In Experiment 1, RTs revealed a large effect of switch probability on the switch cost in the short RCI, which did not increase in the long RCI. Errors hinted at such an increase, but it did not receive clear statistical support and was disconfirmed by a direct and better powered replication in Experiment 2, which fully confirmed the RT pattern from Experiment 1. Thus, the effect of switch probability on the switch cost required little/no time following the response to emerge-it was already at full magnitude at a short RCI-challenging accounts that assume "phasic" deployment of top-down task-set control in advance of the cue.

Does preparation help to switch auditory attention between simultaneous voices: Effects of switch probability and prevalence of conflict.

Switching auditory attention to one of two (or more) simultaneous voices incurs a substantial performance overhead. Whether/when this voice 'switch cost' reduces when the listener has opportunity to prepare in silence is not clear-the findings on the effect of preparation on the switch cost range from (near) null to substantial. We sought to determine which factors are crucial for encouraging preparation and detecting its effect on the switch cost in a paradigm where participants categorized the number spoken by one of two simultaneous voices; the target voice, which changed unpredictably, was specified by a visual cue depicting the target's gender. First, we manipulated the probability of a voice switch. When 25% of trials were switches, increasing the preparation interval (50/800/1,400 ms) resulted in substantial (~50%) reduction in switch cost. No reduction was observed when 75% of trials were switches. Second, we examined the relative prevalence of low-conflict, 'congruent' trials (where the numbers spoken by the two voices were mapped onto the same response) and high-conflict, 'incongruent' trials (where the voices afforded different responses). 'Conflict prevalence' had a strong effect on selectivity-the incongruent-congruent difference ('congruence effect') was reduced in the 66%-incongruent condition relative to the 66%-congruent condition-but conflict prevalence did not discernibly interact with preparation and its effect on the switch cost. Thus, conditions where switches of target voice are relatively rare are especially conducive to preparation, possibly because attention is committed more strongly to (and/or disengaged less rapidly from) the perceptual features of target voice.

Can we prepare to attend to one of two simultaneous voices?

We can selectively attend to one of two simultaneous voices sharing a source location. Can we endogenously select the voice before speech is heard? Participants heard two digit names, spoken simultaneously by a male voice and a female voice, following a visual cue indicating which voice's digit to classify as odd or even. There was a substantial cost in reaction time and errors when the target voice switched from one trial to the next. In Experiment 1, with a highly familiar pair of voices, the switch cost reduced by nearly half as the cue-stimulus interval increased from 50 to 800 ms, indicating (contrary to previous reports) effective endogenous preparation for a change of voice. No further reduction in switch cost occurred with a longer preparation interval-this "residual" switch cost may be attributable to attentional "inertia." In Experiment 2, with previously unfamiliar voices, the pattern of switch costs was very similar, though repeated attention to the same target voice over a run of trials improved performance more. Delaying the onset of one voice by 366 ms improved performance, but the pattern of preparatory tuning effects was similar. Thus, endogenous preparation for a voice is possible, but it is limited in efficacy, as for some other attentional domains. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).