References
- 1Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994).
Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks . In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). MIT Press. - 2Best, V., Ozmeral, E. J., Kopčo, N., & Shinn-Cunningham, B. G. (2008). Object continuity enhances selective auditory attention. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 13174–13178. 10.1073/pnas.0803718105
- 3Best, V., Shinn-Cunningham, B. G., Ozmeral, E. J., & Kopčo, N. (2010). Exploring the benefit of auditory spatial continuity. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, EL258–264. 10.1121/1.3431093
- 4Bronkhorst, A. W. (2015). The cocktail-party problem revisited: early processing and selection of multi-talker speech. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 1465–1487. 10.3758/s13414-015-0882-9
- 5Brungart, D. S. (2001). Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of two simultaneous talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 109, 1101–1109. 10.1121/1.1345696
- 6Brungart, D. S., Simpson, B. D., Ericson, M. A., & Scott, K. R. (2001). Informational and energetic masking effects in the perception of multiple simultaneous talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 110, 2527–2538. 10.1121/1.1408946
- 7Brysbaert, M., & Stevens, M. (2018). Power analysis and effect size in mixed effects models: a tutorial. Journal of Cognition, 1, Article 9. 10.5334/joc.10
- 8Cherry, E. C. (1953). Some experiments on the recognition of speech, with one and with two ears. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 25(5), 975–979. 10.1121/1.1907229
- 9Darwin, C. J. (2008). Listening to speech in the presence of other sounds. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, Biological Sciences, 363, 1011–1021. 10.1098/rstb.2007.2156
- 10Darwin, C. J., Brungart, D. S., & Simpson, B. D. (2003). Effects of fundamental frequency and vocal-tract length changes on attention to one of two simultaneous talkers. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 114, 2913–2922. 10.1121/1.1616924
- 11Darwin, C. J., & Hukin, R. W. (2000). Effectiveness of spatial cues, prosody, and talker characteristics in selective attention. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 107, 970–977. 10.1121/1.428278
- 12Elchlepp, H., Best, M., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2017). Shifting attention between visual dimensions as a source of switch costs. Psychological Science, 28, 470–481. 10.1177/0956797616686855
- 13Elchlepp H., Lavric A., Mizon, G. A., & Monsell, S. (2012). A brain-potential study of preparation for and execution of a task-switch with stimuli that afford only the relevant task. Human Brain Mapping, 33, 1137–1154. 10.1002/hbm.21277
- 14Elchlepp, H., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2015). A change of task prolongs early processes: evidence from ERPs in lexical tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144, 299–325. 10.1037/a0038740
- 15Elchlepp, H., Monsell, S., & Lavric, A. (2021). How task set and task switching modulate perceptual processes: Is recognition of facial emotion an exception? Journal of Cognition, 4, Article 36. 10.5334/joc.179
- 16Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). GPower 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. 10.3758/BF03193146
- 17Holmes, E., Domingo, Y., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2018a). Familiar voices are more intelligible, even if they are not recognized as familiar. Psychological Science, 29, 1575–1583. 10.1177/0956797618779083
- 18Holmes, E., Kitterick, P. T., & Summerfield, A. Q. (2018b). Cueing listeners to attend to a target talker progressively improves word report as the duration of the cue-target interval lengthens to 2,000 ms. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80, 1520–1538. 10.3758/s13414-018-1531-x
- 19Holmes, E., To, G., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2021). How long does it take for a voice to become familiar? Speech intelligibility and voice recognition are differentially sensitive to voice training. Psychological Science, 32, 903–915. 10.1177/0956797621991137
- 20Karayanidis, F., Jamadar, S., Ruge, H., Phillips, N., Heathcote, A., & Forstmann, B. U. (2010). Advance preparation in taskswitching: Converging evidence from behavioral, brain activation, and model-based approaches. Frontiers in Psychology, 25, 1–13. 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00025
- 21Kieffaber, P. D., & Hetrick, W. P. (2005). Event-related potential correlates of task switching and switch costs. Psychophysiology, 42, 56–71. 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00262.x
- 22Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching – A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849–874. 10.1037/a0019842
- 23Kikumoto, A., Hubbard, J., & Mayr, U. (2016). Dynamics of Task-set Carry-over: Evidence from eye-movement analyses. Psychological Bulletin & Review, 23, 899–906. 10.3758/s13423-015-0944-y
- 24Kitterick, P. T., Bailey, P. J., & Summerfield, A. Q. (2010). Benefits of knowing who, where, and when in multi-talker listening. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, 2498–2508. 10.1121/1.3327507
- 25Koch, I., & Kiesel, A. (2022).
Task Switching: Cognitive Control in Sequential Multitasking . In A. Kiesel, L. Johannsen, I. Koch & H. Müller (Eds.), Handbook of Human Multitasking (pp 85–143). Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-031-04760-2_3 - 26Koch, I., & Lawo, V. (2014). Exploring temporal dissipation of attention settings in auditory task switching. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76, 73–80. 10.3758/s13414-013-0571-5
- 27Koch, I., Lawo, V., Fels, J., & Vorlaender, M. (2011). Switching in the cocktail party: exploring intentional control of auditory selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 1140–1147. 10.1037/a0022189
- 28Lavric, A., Mizon, G. A., & Monsell, S. (2008). Neurophysiological signature of effective anticipatory task-set control: a task-switching investigation. European Journal of Neuroscience, 28, 1016–1029. 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06372.x
- 29Lawo, V., Fels, J., Oberem, J., & Koch, I. (2014). Intentional attention switching in dichotic listening: Exploring the efficiency of nonspatial and spatial selection. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 2010–2024. 10.1080/17470218.2014.898079
- 30Lawo, V., & Koch, I. (2015). Attention and action: The role of response mappings in auditory attention switching. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27, 194–206. 10.1080/20445911.2014.995669
- 31Logan, G. D. (2005). The time it takes to switch attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 647–653. 10.3758/BF03196753
- 32Logan, G. D., & Bundesen, C. (2003) Clever homunculus: is there an endogenous act of control in the explicit task-cuing procedure? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 575–599. 10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.575
- 33Longman, C. S., Elchlepp, H., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2021). Serial or parallel proactive control of components of task-set? A task-switching investigation with concurrent EEG and eye-tracking. Neuropsychologia, 160, Article
107984 . 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107984 - 34Longman, C. S., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2013). More attention to attention? An eye-tracking investigation of selection of perceptual attributes during a task switch. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1142–1151. 10.1037/a0030409
- 35Longman, C. S., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2016). The coupling between spatial attention and other components of task-set: A task-switching investigation. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69, 2248–2275. 10.1080/17470218.2015.1115112
- 36Longman, C. S., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2017). Self-paced preparation for a task switch eliminates attentional inertia but not the performance switch cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43, 862–873. 10.1037/xlm0000347
- 37Longman, C. S., Lavric, A., Munteanu, C., & Monsell, S. (2014). Attentional inertia and delayed orienting of spatial attention in task-switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 1580–1602. 10.1037/a0036552
- 38Lukas, S., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). The role of preparation and cue-modality in crossmodal task switching. Acta Psychologica, 134, 318–322. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.03.004
- 39Mayr, U., Kuhns, D., & Rieter, M. (2013). Eye movements reveal dynamics of task control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142, 489–509. 10.1037/a0029353
- 40Meiran, N. (1996). Reconfiguration of processing mode prior to task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1423–1442. 10.1037//0278-7393.22.6.1423
- 41Meiran, N., Chorev, Z., & Sapir, A. (2000). Component processes in task switching. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 211–253. 10.1006/cogp.2000.0736
- 42Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140. 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00028-7
- 43Monsell, S. (2015).
Task-set control and task switching . In J. Fawcett, E. F. Risko, & A. Kingstone (Eds.), The Handbook of Attention, (pp. 139–172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/10033.003.0009 - 44Monsell, S. (2017).
Task set regulation . In T. Egner (Ed.), The Wiley Handbook of Cognitive Control, (pp. 29–49). Chichester, W. Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 10.1002/9781118920497.ch2 - 45Monsell, S., Lavric, A., Strivens, A., & Paul, E. (2019). Can we prepare to attend to one of two simultaneous voices? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 45, 966–982. 10.1037/xhp0000650
- 46Monsell, S., & Mizon, G. A. (2006). Can the task-cuing paradigm measure an endogenous task-set reconfiguration process? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 493–516. 10.1037/0096-1523.32.3.493
- 47Nolden, S., Ibrahim, C. N., & Koch, I. (2019). Cognitive control in the cocktail party: Preparing selective attention to dichotically presented voices supports distractor suppression. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 727–737. 10.3758/s13414-018-1620-x
- 48Nolden, S., & Koch, I. (2017). Intentional switching of auditory attention between long and short sequential tone patterns. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 79, 1132–1146. 10.3758/s13414-017-1298-5
- 49Nolden, S., & Koch, I. (2023). Preparing auditory task switching in a task with overlapping and non-overlapping response sets. Psychological Research. 10.1007/s00426-023-01796-x
- 55Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Cognitive Psychology: General, 124, 207–231. 10.1037//0096-3445.124.2.207
- 50Samson, F., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2016). Effects of a consistent target or masker voice on target speech intelligibility in two- and three-talker mixtures. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 139, 1037–1046. 10.1121/1.4942589
- 51Seibold, J. C., Nolden, S., Oberem, J., Fels, J., & Koch, I. (2018). Intentional preparation of auditory attention-switches: Explicit cueing and sequential switch-predictability. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 71, 1382–1395. 10.1080/17470218.2017.1344867
- 52Shinn-Cunningham, B., & Best, V. (2015).
Auditory selective attention . In J. Fawcett, E. F. Risko, & A. Kingstone (Eds.), The handbook of attention (pp. 99–117). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. - 53Strivens, A., Koch, I., & Lavric, A. (2024a). Does preparation help to switch auditory attention between simultaneous voices: effects of switch probability and prevalence of conflict. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 86, 750–767. 10.3758/s13414-023-02841-y
- 54Strivens, A., Koch, I., & Lavric, A. (2024b). Exploring ‘phasic’ vs. ‘tonic’ accounts of the effect of switch probability on the auditory attention switch cost. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. Advance online publication. 10.1177/17470218241256361
- 56Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F. (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference control. Psychological Bulletin, 136(4), 601–626. 10.1037/a0019791
- 57Van’t Wout, F., Lavric, A., & Monsell, S. (2013). Are stimulus-response rules represented phonologically for task-set preparation and maintenance? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1538–1551. 10.1037/a0031672
- 58Van’t Wout, F., Lavric, A., & Monsell. S. (2015). Is it harder to switch among a larger set of tasks? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 363–376. 10.1037/a0038268
- 59Verbruggen, F., Liefooghe, B., Vandierendonck, A., & Demanet, J. (2007). Short cue presentations encourage advance task preparation: A recipe to diminish the residual switch cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 342–356. 10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.342
- 60Yeung, N., Nystrom, L. E., Aronson, J. A., & Cohen, J. D. (2006). Between-task competition and cognitive control in task switching. Journal of Neuroscsience, 26, 1429–1438. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3109-05.2006