{"title":"Is conflict adaptation adaptive? An introduction to conflict monitoring theory and the ecological problems it faces.","authors":"James R Schmidt","doi":"10.1177/17470218231161555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Attending to a single stimulus (or dimension of a stimulus) requires filtering out distracting stimuli to avoid producing an incorrect response. The conflict monitoring (or conflict adaptation) account proposes that experience of conflict results in a shift of attention away from distracting stimuli and/or towards the target stimulus. The proportion congruent and congruency sequence effects are two findings often used to argue in favour of the conflict monitoring account. However, there are several potential limitations with conflict monitoring theory. This article explores some of the previously unarticulated (or rarely articulated) supplementary assumptions that must be made for the conflict monitoring account to be consistent with several important findings in the literature, some of which might undermine the initial intuitive appeal of the theory. Indeed, this opinion paper presents the view that conflict adaptation may not actually be particularly adaptive for performance. This article also discusses alternative interpretations of so-called \"attentional control\" phenomena. According to this view, participants may simply be learning regularities in the task structure that are unintentionally introduced when manipulating conflict (e.g., contingent regularities between distracting stimuli and responses). This sort of learning does benefit performance and is inherent for our functioning in the world, making this a more parsimonious view. Although simplicity is not everything, this article will present the case that the assumptions (often hidden or non-obvious) of conflict monitoring theory are non-trivial and, in many cases, imply relatively non-adaptive processes.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"865-883"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231161555","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Attending to a single stimulus (or dimension of a stimulus) requires filtering out distracting stimuli to avoid producing an incorrect response. The conflict monitoring (or conflict adaptation) account proposes that experience of conflict results in a shift of attention away from distracting stimuli and/or towards the target stimulus. The proportion congruent and congruency sequence effects are two findings often used to argue in favour of the conflict monitoring account. However, there are several potential limitations with conflict monitoring theory. This article explores some of the previously unarticulated (or rarely articulated) supplementary assumptions that must be made for the conflict monitoring account to be consistent with several important findings in the literature, some of which might undermine the initial intuitive appeal of the theory. Indeed, this opinion paper presents the view that conflict adaptation may not actually be particularly adaptive for performance. This article also discusses alternative interpretations of so-called "attentional control" phenomena. According to this view, participants may simply be learning regularities in the task structure that are unintentionally introduced when manipulating conflict (e.g., contingent regularities between distracting stimuli and responses). This sort of learning does benefit performance and is inherent for our functioning in the world, making this a more parsimonious view. Although simplicity is not everything, this article will present the case that the assumptions (often hidden or non-obvious) of conflict monitoring theory are non-trivial and, in many cases, imply relatively non-adaptive processes.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.