Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off

Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Qiao, Lei [verfasserIn] Zhang, Lijie [verfasserIn] Chen, Antao [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching

Übergeordnetes Werk:	Enthalten in: International journal of psychophysiology - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983, 191, Seite 29-41
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:191 ; pages:29-41

DOI / URN:	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002

Katalog-ID:	ELV061849758

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	ELV061849758
003	DE-627
005	20230928110548.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230818s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)ELV061849758
035			\|a (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rda
041			\|a eng
082	0	4	\|a 610 \|q VZ
084			\|a 77.50 \|2 bkl
100	1		\|a Qiao, Lei \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a nicht spezifiziert \|b zzz \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study.
650		4	\|a Cognitive flexibility
650		4	\|a Cognitive stability
650		4	\|a Stability–flexibility trade-off
650		4	\|a Task switching
700	1		\|a Zhang, Lijie \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	1		\|a Chen, Antao \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i Enthalten in \|t International journal of psychophysiology \|d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983 \|g 191, Seite 29-41 \|h Online-Ressource \|w (DE-627)306659646 \|w (DE-600)1500484-3 \|w (DE-576)081986300 \|x 1872-7697 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:191 \|g pages:29-41
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_U
912			\|a GBV_ELV
912			\|a SYSFLAG_U
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_32
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_90
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_100
912			\|a GBV_ILN_101
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_187
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_224
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_702
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2001
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2004
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2015
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2020
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2021
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2025
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2026
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2034
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2044
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2048
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2049
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2050
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2056
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2059
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2061
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2064
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2106
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2122
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2129
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2143
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2152
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2153
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2232
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2336
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2470
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2507
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4035
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4242
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4251
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4333
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4334
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4393
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
936	b	k	\|a 77.50 \|j Psychophysiologie \|q VZ
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 191 \|h 29-41

Indexfelder

author_variant	l q lq l z lz a c ac
matchkey_str	article:18727697:2023----::otodlmavdnefhsaiiyl
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
bklnumber	77.50
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002 doi (DE-627)ELV061849758 (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 77.50 bkl Qiao, Lei verfasserin aut Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study. Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching Zhang, Lijie verfasserin aut Chen, Antao verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983 191, Seite 29-41 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306659646 (DE-600)1500484-3 (DE-576)081986300 1872-7697 nnns volume:191 pages:29-41 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 77.50 Psychophysiologie VZ AR 191 29-41
spelling	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002 doi (DE-627)ELV061849758 (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 77.50 bkl Qiao, Lei verfasserin aut Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study. Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching Zhang, Lijie verfasserin aut Chen, Antao verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983 191, Seite 29-41 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306659646 (DE-600)1500484-3 (DE-576)081986300 1872-7697 nnns volume:191 pages:29-41 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 77.50 Psychophysiologie VZ AR 191 29-41
allfields_unstemmed	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002 doi (DE-627)ELV061849758 (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 77.50 bkl Qiao, Lei verfasserin aut Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study. Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching Zhang, Lijie verfasserin aut Chen, Antao verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983 191, Seite 29-41 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306659646 (DE-600)1500484-3 (DE-576)081986300 1872-7697 nnns volume:191 pages:29-41 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 77.50 Psychophysiologie VZ AR 191 29-41
allfieldsGer	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002 doi (DE-627)ELV061849758 (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 77.50 bkl Qiao, Lei verfasserin aut Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study. Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching Zhang, Lijie verfasserin aut Chen, Antao verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983 191, Seite 29-41 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306659646 (DE-600)1500484-3 (DE-576)081986300 1872-7697 nnns volume:191 pages:29-41 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 77.50 Psychophysiologie VZ AR 191 29-41
allfieldsSound	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002 doi (DE-627)ELV061849758 (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 77.50 bkl Qiao, Lei verfasserin aut Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study. Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching Zhang, Lijie verfasserin aut Chen, Antao verfasserin aut Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983 191, Seite 29-41 Online-Ressource (DE-627)306659646 (DE-600)1500484-3 (DE-576)081986300 1872-7697 nnns volume:191 pages:29-41 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 77.50 Psychophysiologie VZ AR 191 29-41
language	English
source	Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology 191, Seite 29-41 volume:191 pages:29-41
sourceStr	Enthalten in International journal of psychophysiology 191, Seite 29-41 volume:191 pages:29-41
format_phy_str_mv	Article
bklname	Psychophysiologie
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching
dewey-raw	610
isfreeaccess_bool	false
container_title	International journal of psychophysiology
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Qiao, Lei @@aut@@ Zhang, Lijie @@aut@@ Chen, Antao @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	306659646
dewey-sort	3610
id	ELV061849758
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV061849758</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230928110548.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230818s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV061849758</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">77.50</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Qiao, Lei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cognitive flexibility</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cognitive stability</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Stability–flexibility trade-off</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Task switching</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhang, Lijie</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chen, Antao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">International journal of psychophysiology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983</subfield><subfield code="g">191, Seite 29-41</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)306659646</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1500484-3</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)081986300</subfield><subfield code="x">1872-7697</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:191</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:29-41</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">77.50</subfield><subfield code="j">Psychophysiologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">191</subfield><subfield code="h">29-41</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Qiao, Lei
spellingShingle	Qiao, Lei ddc 610 bkl 77.50 misc Cognitive flexibility misc Cognitive stability misc Stability–flexibility trade-off misc Task switching Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
authorStr	Qiao, Lei
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)306659646
format	electronic Article
dewey-ones	610 - Medicine & health
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut
collection	elsevier
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	1872-7697
topic_title	610 VZ 77.50 bkl Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off Cognitive flexibility Cognitive stability Stability–flexibility trade-off Task switching
topic	ddc 610 bkl 77.50 misc Cognitive flexibility misc Cognitive stability misc Stability–flexibility trade-off misc Task switching
topic_unstemmed	ddc 610 bkl 77.50 misc Cognitive flexibility misc Cognitive stability misc Stability–flexibility trade-off misc Task switching
topic_browse	ddc 610 bkl 77.50 misc Cognitive flexibility misc Cognitive stability misc Stability–flexibility trade-off misc Task switching
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	International journal of psychophysiology
hierarchy_parent_id	306659646
dewey-tens	610 - Medicine & health
hierarchy_top_title	International journal of psychophysiology
isfreeaccess_txt	false
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)306659646 (DE-600)1500484-3 (DE-576)081986300
title	Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
ctrlnum	(DE-627)ELV061849758 (ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4
title_full	Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
author_sort	Qiao, Lei
journal	International journal of psychophysiology
journalStr	International journal of psychophysiology
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	false
dewey-hundreds	600 - Technology
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	zzz
container_start_page	29
author_browse	Qiao, Lei Zhang, Lijie Chen, Antao
container_volume	191
class	610 VZ 77.50 bkl
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Qiao, Lei
doi_str_mv	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002
dewey-full	610
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	control dilemma: evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
title_auth	Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
abstract	Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study.
abstractGer	Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study.
abstract_unstemmed	Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off
remote_bool	true
author2	Zhang, Lijie Chen, Antao
author2Str	Zhang, Lijie Chen, Antao
ppnlink	306659646
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	false
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002
up_date	2024-07-06T18:07:39.455Z
_version_	1803854030525431808
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV061849758</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230928110548.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230818s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.07.002</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV061849758</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0167-8760(23)00480-4</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">77.50</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Qiao, Lei</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cognitive control can be applied flexibly when task goals or environments change (i.e., cognitive flexibility), or stably to pursue a goal in the face of distraction (i.e., cognitive stability). Whether these seemingly contradictory characteristics have an inverse relationship has been controversial, as some studies have suggested a trade-off mechanism between cognitive flexibility and cognitive stability, while others have not found such reciprocal associations. This study investigated the possible antagonistic correlation between cognitive flexibility and stability using a novel version of the flexibility–stability paradigm and the classic cued task switching paradigm. In Experiment 1, we showed that cognitive flexibility was inversely correlated with cognitive stability, as increased distractor proportions were associated with decreased cognitive flexibility and greater cognitive stability. Moreover, cognitive flexibility and stability were regulated by a single control system instead of two independent control mechanisms, as the model selection results indicated that the reciprocally regulated model with one integration parameter outperformed all other models, and the model parameter was inversely linked to cognitive flexibility and stability. We found similar results using the classic cued task switching paradigm in Experiment 2. Therefore, a trade-off between cognitive flexibility and stability was observed from the paradigms used in this study.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cognitive flexibility</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Cognitive stability</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Stability–flexibility trade-off</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Task switching</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhang, Lijie</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chen, Antao</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">International journal of psychophysiology</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier Science, 1983</subfield><subfield code="g">191, Seite 29-41</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)306659646</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)1500484-3</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)081986300</subfield><subfield code="x">1872-7697</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:191</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:29-41</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">77.50</subfield><subfield code="j">Psychophysiologie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">191</subfield><subfield code="h">29-41</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4011316

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Control dilemma: Evidence of the stability–flexibility trade-off

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?