Contingency learning is reduced for high conflict stimuli

Cognitive control controls the effect of irrelevant stimulus-response learning

Research has established that two cognitive processes, cognitive control and irrelevant stimulus-response (S-R) learning, may underlie the proportion congruency effect, which refers to the findings that the size of interference effects (e.g., the Stroop, Simon, or Eriksen flanker effect) reduces with increasing the proportion of incongruent trials. Further studies have begun to investigate the interaction between these two cognitive processes, which not only provide more plausible accounts for empirical data, but also advance theories. The present study set out to investigate whether cognitive control can modulate the effect of irrelevant S-R learning. In two experiments, we combined a color-letter contingency task, in which we manipulated the contingencies (low vs. high) of irrelevant S-R associations, with a color-Chinese character Stroop task, in which we manipulated the ratio of neutral to incongruent trials (mostly neutral (MN) versus mostly incongruent (MI)). Experiment 1 showed a proportion neutral effect (the Stroop effect was smaller in the MI than in the MN condition), suggesting changes in control demand. Critically, the contingency effect (faster responses in the high- than in the low-contingency condition) reduced in the MI than in the MN condition. Experiment 2 (preregistered) increased the number of Chinese characters to exclude a familiarity account for the proportion neutral effect, which replicated the findings of Experiment 1. These results suggest that cognitive control induced in the Stroop task transferred to the contingency task and modulated the contingency effect. Thus, this study provides clear evidence that cognitive control can modulate the effect of irrelevant S-R learning.

Response-Category Conflict and Control Mode Determine Memory Performance for Distractors in a Flanker Paradigm

Cognitive conflicts can lead to better memory for task-relevant information. However, little is known about memory performance for task-irrelevant information. The present study investigated memory performance of task-irrelevant distractors using a Flanker paradigm. In two experiments (N = 699), participants first completed a study phase with 56 flanker trials. The stimuli consisted of trial-unique pictures. A congruent trial consisted of a target flanked by two identical pictures from the same category (e.g., all mammals). An incongruent trial consisted of a target and flankers from different stimulus categories (e.g., a mammal flanked by two identical birds), which results in a response-category conflict. To explore the impact of different control modes, congruent and incongruent trials were presented in pure blocks (allowing a proactive control mode) or in mixed blocks (requiring a reactive control mode). Afterwards, recognition memory was tested in a surprise memory test. In general, the results showed better memory for congruent than incongruent flankers in pure blocks. In contrast in mixed blocks, the results showed better memory for incongruent than for congruent flankers. Thus, memory performance for distractors varies systematically with response-category conflict and control mode.

Proactive control affects task conflict beyond contingency learning

Various models of the Stroop task suggest that proactive task control adaptation accounts for the modulation of task conflict in different conditions of the Stroop task, for example, when task conflict is very frequent or very infrequent. Other researchers have argued that a contingency learning of colour-word associations is the main contributor to the modulations of the Stroop effect. In this work, we constructed a design that controls for confounds that are suspected to rule out the role of control adaptation in the Stroop task. We focused on one type of conflict-task conflict and tested whether colour-naming of neutral-words (where task conflict is present) differed from colour-naming of neutral-symbols (where task conflict is not present) in four different conditions: mostly words-congruent, mostly words-incongruent, mostly words-neutral, or mostly non-words-shape. Importantly, the conditions used for the task conflict marker were identical in all four conditions. We found that the marker of task conflict (reaction time [RT] for neutral-words > RT for neutral-symbols) was significant in the mostly non-words-shape condition, where proactive task control is relaxed, but not in the mostly words conditions, where proactive task control is activated, with no difference between these three words conditions. These findings suggest that control adaptation is the main contributor to the modulations of the Stroop effect. The relevance of the results to the current literature is discussed and the results are explained in light of the proactive control-task conflict (PC-TC) model.

Contingency learning and episodic contributions to the item-specific proportion congruent effect

Several studies have challenged the conflict adaptation account of cognitive control effects, suggesting that they are the result of learning/memory processes independent from control modulation. Some authors have suggested that the item-specific proportion congruent (ISPC) effect (i.e., the smaller congruency effect on items presented frequently in an incongruent combination) is driven by colour-word contingency learning (CL). However, it has recently been suggested that CL can be explained in terms of episodic retrieval of the response given to the last encounter with the same stimulus, with no role of associative learning. This study aims to analyse the independent role of CL and episodic retrieval on the ISPC effect. Experiment 1 showed no effect of control modulation and indicated that, when manipulated independently, learning-driven contingency is modulated by the episodic factor, but it remains significant. Experiments 2 and 3 extended the study of the interplay between learning and recency to the colour-word CL paradigm, finding larger contingency effects on colour words compared with neutral ones and replicating the interaction between CL and episodic retrieval from Experiment 1. Surprisingly, these two experiments also showed control modulation apart from contingency and recency effects in colour words. In sum, our study reveals that the ISPC effect results from the joint contribution of cognitive control, associative learning, and episodic effects.

Proportion of conflict, contingency learning, and recency effects in a Stroop task

Recent research on the relation between learning and cognitive control has assumed that conflict modulates learning, either by increasing arousal and hence improving learning in high-conflict situations, or by inducing control, and hence inhibiting the processing of distracters and their eventual association with the imperative responses. We analyse whether the amount of conflict, manipulated through the proportion of congruency in a set of Stroop inducer trials, affects learning of contingencies established on diagnostic trials composed by neutral words associated with colour responses. The results reproduced the list-wide proportion of congruency effect on the inducer trials, and showed evidence of contingency learning on the diagnostic trials, but provided no indication that this learning was modulated by the level of conflict. Specific analyses conducted to control for the impact of episodic effects on the expression of learning indicated that contingency effects were not driven by the incremental processes that could be expected by associative learning, but rather they were due to the impact of the most recent trial involving the same distracter. Accordingly, these effects disappeared when tested selectively on trials that required a non-matching response with respect to the previous occurrence of the distracter. We interpret this result in the context of the debate on how learning and memory interact with the processes of cognitive control.

Evidence against conflict monitoring and adaptation: An updated review

One of the most influential ideas in recent decades in the cognitive psychology literature is conflict monitoring theory. According to this account, each time we experience a conflict (e.g., between a colour word and print colour in the Stroop task), attentional control is upregulated to minimize distraction on subsequent trials. Though influential, evidence purported to support this theoretical model (primarily, proportion congruent and congruency sequence effects) has been frequently criticized. Furious debate has centered on whether or not conflict monitoring does or does not occur and, if so, under which conditions. The present article presents an updated review of this debate. In particular, the article considers new research that either (a) seems particularly damaging for the conflict monitoring view or (b) seems to provide support for the theory. The author argues that new findings of the latter sort are still not compelling, several of which have already-demonstrated confounds and others which are plausibly confounded. Further progress has, to a greater extent than not, provided even stronger support for the position that conflict monitoring is merely an illusion. Instead, the net results can be more coherently understood in terms of (relatively) simpler learning/memory biases unrelated to conflict or attention that confound the key paradigms.