Call for papers: Conflict adaptation across single-task and multi-tasking paradigms

• Luca Moretti, University of Milan-Bicocca
• Elena Benini, University of Zurich
• Julie M. Bugg, Washington University in St. Louis

Over the last 30 years, cognitive-control research has extensively focused on conflict adaptation, namely the processes by which control mechanisms are up- or down-regulated depending on prior experiences of cognitive conflict (Botvinick et al., 2001; Braver 2012). As a result of these efforts, many signatures of conflict adaptation are now evidenced in both single-task (e.g., Stroop, flanker, Simon paradigms) and multi-tasking contexts (task-switching and dual tasking). Nonetheless, for a long time these effects have been studied in isolation within each paradigm. Only in recent years the field has witnessed a growing interest in bringing these research strands closer together, starting to gain a broader understanding of how humans exploit contextual information to adapt control. The goal of this special issue is to foster this endeavour by addressing three core questions that single- and multi-tasking paradigms pose to each other.

The first question concerns how we adapt to conflict stemming from different sources. It is now recognized that both in single- and multi-tasking paradigms conflict arises at different levels of processing (Parris et al. 2022; Schuch et al., 2019), such as conflict in response selection, task selection, and, in the Stroop, at the semantic level. However, little research has examined how, or even whether, adaptation is specific to the type of conflict (e.g., task or response conflict) encountered. Therefore, it remains unclear whether adapting to one type of conflict impacts the subsequent resolution of other conflict types. More generally, it is still unknown whether conflict arising at one level of processing cascades to other levels.

The second question addresses the mechanisms underlying conflict adaptation. In single-task paradigms, conflict adaptation has often been explained in terms of different attentional weighting to the task-relevant and task-irrelevant feature depending on conflict history (Braem et al., 2019). Such a mechanism is invoked both when accounting for transient-adaptation phenomena (e.g., the CSE or item-specific effects; Egner, 2017) and sustained-adaptation phenomena (i.e., list-wide effects; Bugg & Crump, 2012). However, sustained shifts in attentional weighting are unlikely to account for similar adaptation phenomena in multi-tasking settings (e.g., Bugg & Braver, 2016; Monsell & Mizon, 2006; Moretti & Koch, 2026) take place in multi-tasking settings, as the task-(ir)relevant feature can switch on any trial. As a result, despite evidence consistent with sustained control adaptation in both paradigms, it is yet uncertain how these come about in multi-tasking settings.

Finally, the third question explores the relationship between the ability to stay focused on the task-relevant feature (i.e., cognitive stability) and the ability to switch between tasks (i.e., cognitive flexibility). These abilities have classically been assumed to trade off (Goschke, 2003; 2013), such that stability can only be augmented at the expenses of flexibility (and vice versa). An ongoing debate, however, challenges this notion, suggesting that cognitive stability and flexibility may represent two distinct dimensions that can be up- and down-regulated independently (Egner 2023; Mayr & Gratz, 2024; Nack & Chiu, 2023). While a plethora of studies provided novel evidence in favour of such independence (Geddert & Egner 2022, 2024), it is currently questioned whether the lack of a trade-off stems from measuring stability and flexibility at different levels of processing (Dreisbach et al., 2024).

This special issue invites submissions that offer empirical or theoretical advances on the topic of conflict adaptation in both single-task and multi-tasking paradigms. We welcome a broad range of contributions, including original research, review articles, and meta-analyses. 

Submissions may employ diverse methodologies, such as behavioral experiments, computational modeling, neuroimaging (e.g., fMRI, EEG/ERP), or physiological measures (e.g., pupillometry). All manuscripts will undergo rigorous peer review in line with the journal’s standard editorial process.

In order to submit a contribution to the special issue, please select this option from the drop-down menu in the editorial manager. Furthermore, please refer explicitly to the special issue when preparing the cover letter.

For any questions regarding scope or suitability, please contact the guest editors: Luca Moretti, Elena Benini, and Julie M. Bugg.