Evidence of task-triggered retrieval of the previous response: a binding perspective on response-repetition benefits in task switching

In task switching, response repetitions (RRs) usually yield performance benefits as compared to response switches, but only when the task also repeats. When the task switches, RR benefits vanish or even turn into costs, yielding an interaction between repeating versus switching the task and the response (the RR effect). Different theoretical accounts for this RR effect exist, but, in the present study, we specifically tested a prediction derived from binding and retrieval accounts. These maintain that repeating the task retrieves the previous-trial response, thus causing RR benefits. Retrieval is possible due to the task-response binding formed in the previous trial. We employed a task-switching paradigm with three response options that allowed us to differentiate error types. Across two experiments (N = 46 and N = 107) we showed that response-repetition errors in response-switch trials were more likely in task repetitions than in task switches, supporting the notion that the previous response is retrieved by the repeating task, despite being wrong. Such a finding is in line with binding and retrieval accounts but cannot be easily accommodated by the competing theoretical accounts. Thus, the present study indicates task-response binding as an important mechanism underlying RR benefits in task repetitions.

Automated summary

In task switching, repeating a response usually improves performance, but only when the task also repeats. This study provides evidence that repeating response errors are more likely in task repetitions than in task switches, supporting the importance of task-response binding in the repetition effect.