cognitive set- switching and nervous system properties (nsps)

8/13/2019 Cognitive Set- switching and Nervous System properties (NSPs)

1/14

IRJMST Volume 5 Issue 1 Online ISSN 2250 - 1959

International Research Journal of Management Science & Technologyhttp:www.irjmst.com Page 49

Cognitive Set- switching and Nervous System properties (NSPs)

Sandeep Kumar* Bindu Kumari** & Rajbir Singh***

* & ** Research Scholar, Dept. of Psychology,

M.D. University, Rohtak, Haryana

[email protected] &[email protected]

*** Professor, Dept. of Psychology,

M.D. University, Rohtak, Haryana

[email protected]

Abstract

Executive functions/mechanisms are of essential importance for goal directed and

efficient behavior. They guarantee cognitive flexibility in our daily activities by planning,

initiating, configuring and monitoring many perceptual-motor processes. An interesting

approach for examining the functional characteristics of executive mental processes is the

task/set switching. An individuals both, internal and external; body functions are

controlled and regulated by nervous processes. Properties of nervous system (such as

Mobility, Lability, Equilibrium / balance etc.) are the basic characteristics of the

functional system ensuring integrative activity of the brain and the whole nervous system.

Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST), a good measure of set-switching was used and

Plasticity and Tempo scales of Structure of Temperament Questionnaire (STQ) were used

for measuring Mobility and Lability. A sample of N=80 students, age ranges between 15

to 18 years were studied and it was found that significant intermeasure correlation was

found between WCST dimensions and a little correlation was found between lability and

set-switching.

Keywords:Executive function, Set-switching, Switch cost, Nervous system property
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/14



One of the earliest Eastern pioneers in the area of nervous system activity level, and

the one who first proposed the concept of endurable ranges for simulations was Ivan

Pavlov. The well-known Reflex Theory was described first in Setchenovs bookReflexi

golovnogo mozga [Reflexes of the brain] (1863) and later expanded by I.P. Pavlov as an

experimental physiology of the higher nervous system. I.M. Setchenov proposed

involuntary and voluntary reflex mechanisms of brain activity and concluded that

psychology in isolation from physiology is not science. Later, Pavlov developed the

reflex theory that was based on 3 principles:

1. Causalitythere are no processes without cause;2. Structurethere are no processes without brain structure, all brain processes are

confined to structure; and

3. Analysis and Synthesis all processes involve the analysis and synthesis of thestimulus.

In fact, Pavlovs ingenious discovery starts with a pure physiological experiment about

regulation of the digestive system and concludes by bringing about an absolutely new

branch of physiology of the higher nervous system. He proved Setchenovs idea

experimentally by showing the potential to study the psyche by physiological methods.

The perspicacious observation of the individual differences in conditioning reflex was

explained by the distinction between excitatory and inhibitory processes, their strength,balance, and mobility.

Two ideas of Pavlov have become very popular. First is, the theory of three basic

properties of the nervous system i.e. strength of the nervous system, equilibrium of the

excitation and inhibition processes, mobility of nervous system. Second idea is about the

theory which stated that there are four basic types of nervous system. The theory of four

types of nervous system mainly comes from Pavlovs three basic properties of nervous

system. Originally, Pavlov built his type classification on the principle of equilibrium

between the excitation and inhibition processes. But later on, he based his classification

on the strength of the nervous system, assigning the equilibrium principle to second place

and in his final variant of the classification Pavlov intentionally used the last of the

proposed properties of the nervous system, i.e., mobility of the nervous processes.


3/14



Pavlovs first two properties, namely, the strength of nervous system with regard

to excitation and strength of nervous system with regard to inhibition are much well

known but his third property is the most obscured, which is, mobility of nervous

processes. Teplov, an adherent to the Pavlovs conception of the individual differences in

higher nervous system, asserted the necessity of the extension of research in this direction

by using new methods and techniques. His report: The Theory of Types of Higher

Nervous system activity and Psychology at the International Congress of Psychology

(Teplov, 1955a, 1955b) became an important step from physiology to psychology of

individual differences. He improved the research methods that studied the parameters of

the higher nervous system and allowed new principles to be proposed. Teplov and his

disciple, named, Nebilitcyn (1976) suggested new independent parameters of the nervous

system: lability as a characteristic of the excitation and inhibition rate, and dynamics

as an excitation dynamic and inhibition dynamic. The term mobility seems suitable for

denoting the property characterized by the speed of transformation (physiologists used it

in this way with experiments on animals). Data obtained in these experiments indicate

that the mobility of excitation and that of inhibition may be different. But the indices of

speed of initiation and termination of the excitatory processes show good correlation with

each other, and no correlation with speed of transformation. The property of nervous

system characterized by them may be named lability (Teplov, 1963). Thus, inconclusion, mainly four properties of nervous system are proposed which are: (1)

strength (endurance), (2) dynamism (the ease of generation of nervous system), (3)

mobility (speed of transformation), and (4) lability (the speed of initiation and

termination of the nervous processes). Each of these properties is different from each

other in regard to the excitatory or inhibitory processes.

Bodily functions (both internal and external) are mainly controlled and regulated

by nervous processes which are concerned with the co-ordination and control of

responses to environmental stimuli and appropriate behavior through a bundle of

independently conducting neural fibers. Soviet psychologists, from whom the individual

differences approach to studies of personality was for a long time the most representative

(cited in Strelau, 1987), conceptualize temperament as the properties of nervous system


4/14



revealed in behavior and human actions (Smirnov, Leontev, Rubistein & Teplov, 1966).

Temperament is defined as personality traits which are present since early childhood that

can be observed not only in human behavior but also in animals, and refers rather to

formal aspects of behavior (Strelau, 1998). In the context of the Pavlovian theory of

temperament, mobility of the nervous system (MO) is a temperament trait expressed in

the temporal aspects of behavior. Formal characteristics of behavior can be considered in

terms of energetic and temporal patterns. Temperamental traits, being more or less

unspecific, penetrate all kinds of behavior, whatever the content or direction of this

behavior. According to present views, the properties of nervous system (such as Mobility,

Lability, Equilibrium / balance etc.) are the basic characteristics of the functional system

ensuring integrative activity of the brain and the whole nervous system.

o Mobility has been described as the speed of transformation of nervous processesi.e. time taken in change of ongoing process.

o Lability may be defined as the speed of arousal and termination of nervousprocesses, i.e. time taken in initiation and cessation of any activity.

o Equilibrium/balance is the relative readiness with which the nervous systemgenerates excitatory or inhibitory processes in the formation of conditioned

reflexes, in the speed of substituting one process for the other, and so on. It can be

represented by the end process of interference-facilitation among two or moreexcitatory or / and inhibitory processes at the same time - presently taken as

cognitive interference- for e.g. Stroop color-word interference (Stroop, 1935).

Human behavior and cognition are characterized by the ability to adapt to a dynamic

environment, whether in attention, action or both. From a cognitive psychological

perspective, human beings are basically conceptualized as dynamic information

processing system whose mental operations can be described in computational terms

(Neisser, 1967). In our day to day life, we have to do various types of activities, in which

we have to change our attention or action from one activity to another and to make

decisions accordingly so that we adapt or adjust to our surroundings adequately or

properly. Individual differences exist in this ability to shift between various types of

tasks. Some may switch very quickly from one task to another and hence results to a


5/14



faster shifting while others may take long time, hence, results to a slower shifting. This

ability of individuals which is associated with an ability to switch response sets on the

basis of feedback is known as Set Switching.

Set-switching: It may be defined as a cognitive operation that entails an ability to switch

response sets, whereby one must inhibit previously learned rules and apply new ones. It

includes rule switching -switching between a set of rules and perceptual switching -

switching between set of features presented simultaneously (Ravizza & Carter, 2008).

Previous literature related to this area clearly revealed that much emphasis has been on

task parameters/variables (Allport et al., 1994; Rogers & Monsell, 1995; De Jong, 2000)

and little efforts have been dedicated to study the explanatory constructs based on

individual temperamental types for set-switching.

A lot of research has been done by psychologists on nervous system properties, its

types and construct validation (Pavlov, 1952; Kolesnikov, 1953; Krushinsky, 1947;

Nebylitsyn , 1959) found that high anxiety goes together with weak nervous processes

and this weak high sensitivity of nervous system determines the speed of conditioning.

Mangan (1967) used tasks as transformation mobility, perceptual flexibility, originality

and fluency. Results of their study showed that mobile subjects, because of strong

inhibitory control, seem able to change set more efficiently. Gray (1964) found that the

weak nervous system is more highly aroused and the personality dimension known asstrength of nervous system could be described as arousability. Eysenck (1966); Eysenck

and Levey, (1972) used this hypothesis in order to explain the relationship between

strength of excitation and extraversion but the previous researches did not support the

hypothesis. Slough, Brebner, Nettlebeck and Cooper (1996) found mobility was related to

performance IQ and Ravens test scores. Johnson (2008) investigated the relationship

between set switching and transfer learning, both of which presumably invoke executive

functioning (EF), which may in turn be correlated with intelligence. Developmental

studies have established that set switching abilities developed during childhood and

reached adult level of performance at age 12 (Cepeda, Kramer, & Gonzqlez de Sather,

2001; Chelune & Baer,1986; Crone et al.,2004; Crone, Bunge , Van der Molen, &

Ridderinkhof, 2006; Crone, Ridderinkhof, Worm, Somsen, and Van der Molen,2004;


6/14



Huizinga & Van der Molen, 2007; Kray, Eber, & Lindenberger,2004; Letho,2004;

Welsh et al, 1991;) whereas set-maintenance abilities continued to develop into

adolescence (Chelune & Baer,1986; Crone et al.,2004). Above researches clearly

indicate that there exists a notable gap to explain variations in cognitive set switching.

In recent years, a number of investigations have also been conducted in India

related to present study. In his study, Srivastva (1976) found extraversion was correlated

with motor transformation mobility. Kohli and Kaur (2006) in their study found

significant differences in scores of Indian and Western sample on Wisconsin card sorting

test, more cognitive interference was found in Indian sample as compared to Western.

Pati and Dash (1990) found females show less cognitive interference than males. Rathee

and Singh (1999) studied construct validation of lability and mobility of nervous system,

suggesting that mobility and labiality are two separate constructs. A little work has been

done on nervous system properties and set switching in India.

Rationale of present study:

In our todays fast paced and competitive life we have to face various types of problems

and in solution of many such problems our cognitive system plays a very important role.

In fact, it is cognitive system that enables an individual to make independent and/or

accurate decisions by proper planning, abstract thinking, initiating appropriate actions

and inhibiting inappropriate ones. Set-switching is one such cognitive operation thatentails an ability to switch response sets, whereby one must inhibit previously learned

rules and apply new ones (Barcelo & Knight, 2002). Some persons engaged in task may

shift easily and other may face difficulty (more time and more errors which are referred

as switch cost). Our bodily functions (both internal and external) are mainly controlled

and regulated by nervous processes which are concerned with the co-ordination and

control of responses to environmental stimuli and appropriate behavior through a bundle

of independently conducting neural fibers. According to present views, the properties of

nervous system (such as Mobility, Lability, Equilibrium / balance etc.) are the basic

characteristics of the functional system ensuring integrative activity of the brain and the

whole nervous system. So, considering the importance of the present topic, present


7/14



research was conducted to explain variations in cognitive set- switching on the bases of

individual differences in nervous processes.

Objective of study:

To explain variations in cognitive set switching on the bases of individual differences in

nervous processes.

Hypothesis of study:

There will be individual differences in cognitive set switching due to nervous system

properties i.e. more mobile and more labile individuals shall have low switch costs.

Method

Subjects:

A sample of 80 subjects (only boys) of age ranges between 15 to 18 years from Jawahar

Navodyaya Vidalaya, Ghuskani, Rohtak who voluntary agree to participate in the study

were selected for the present study.

Tools used:

1. Structure of Temperament Questionnaire: STQ (Plasticity and Tempo scales):

STQ by Rusalov (1989) proposed a structure of temperament comprising four traits-

ergonicity, plasticity, speed or tempo and emotionality. Each dimension consists of two

sub-dimensions- object oriented and subject oriented. Plasticity (PI) defined as ability to

switch one activity from to another (Rusalov), is in fact a substitution of Pavlovianmobility. Plasticity of STQ and mobility of PTS (Ruch, Angleitner & Strelau, 1990) were

found positively correlated. The concept of tempo (speed) as developed by Rusalov was

found relating to the neo-Pavlovian concept of lability.

2. Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST): WCST is considered as a good measure of set-

switching. It requires subjects to sort cards on the basis of some rule, and then to switch

to a new rule when the task changes. The rules constantly change, creating the dual

challenge of learning new rules and inhibiting the old ones. For each rule in the WCST,

subjects must develop a unique rule-like strategy used for responding to the stimuli,

known as a response set. As rules change on subsequent problems, subjects must generate

and employ appropriate response sets. In the WCST, for example, one may be sorting

cards on the basis of color (a color response set) and then switch to a different response


8/14



set (e.g., shape). Performance on the WCST is measured by perseveration errors, which

occur when a subject responds according to an old rule even though he or she is aware

that a new rule is in effect. Thus, a perseveration error takes place when an incorrect

response set is used and is an error in set-switching. Presumably, perseveration errors

result from failure to inhibit the previously learned response set, failure to implement the

new response set, or a combination of both.

Procedure:

Subjects were contacted personally and only those subjects who voluntarily agree to

participate in the study were selected. The tests were administered individually. First of

all, standardized instructions for WCST were provided to them. If the instructions were

not clear to anyone, then relevant information was provided to them and their doubts

were cleared. Sufficient time was provided to the subjects to respond and their responses

were recorded on record booklet. After they had finished the test, the cards were collected

and STQ was given to them. Each subject was instructed individually for this test also. If

they have any query about test or instruction, then relevant information was provided to

them. After the completion of both tests, they were thanked for their cooperation.

Results and Discussion:

Pearsons correlation was applied for analyzing the obtained data. Table 1 represents

relationship between various dimensions of WCST and measures of Structure ofTemperament Questionnaire (STQ).

Table 1 showing correlation between dimensions of WCST and STQ

Trials Correct Error

P

response NOCC TTCFC FTMS P SP T Trials taken 1

Correct .40** 1

Error .91** -.02 1


9/14



Preservative

(P)

Response

.86**

-.02 .94** 1

NOCC -.73** .17 -.88** -.86** 1

TTCFC .45** -.07 .53** .40** -.57** 1

FTMS .51 .66 .25 .31 -.32 .15 1

Plasticity -.08 .11 -.14 -.10 .211 -.10 -.00 1

Social

Plasticity

-.15 -.18 -.07 -.07 -.02 .14 -.11 -.10 1

Tempo .02 -.10 .07 .05 -.00 -.02 -.06 .36**

-.06 1

Social

Tempo

.14 -.15 .22* .21 -.23* .16 .09 .22* -.07 .40**

**p< .01 *p


10/14



errors made and no. of categories completed. It means that more the errors made by the

subjects, less will be the categories completed.

A significant positive correlation was found between preservative responses to

failure to maintain set and trials to complete first category. It indicates that with an

increase in preservative responses, an increment in failure to maintain set and trials to

complete first category also takes place. A significant negative correlation was obtained

between preservative responses and no. of categories completed i.e. with an increase in

no. of preservative responses; decrement in no. of categories completed by subjects takes

place. A significant negative correlation was obtained between no. of categories

completed to trials taken by subjects to complete first category and failure to maintain

set. It means that more the categories completed by the subjects, less will be the trials to

complete first category, as well as set failure or failure to maintain set.

Relation between various dimensions of WCST and measures of STQ seems to

have a little correlation (Table1). From table, it is clear that only social tempo (i.e.

Lability) shows a correlation to some extent with dimensions of WCST. Social tempo

was found significantly and positively correlated with no. of errors made by subjects. It

means that individuals, who have a high speed of speech in social interactions and other

social activities/processes, also have more errors in task-switching and vice-versa. A

significant negative correlation was found between Social tempo/lability and no. ofcategories completed. It indicates that individuals, who have high speed of

transformation, also have less no. of categories completed. Measures or characteristics of

temperament such as plasticity was also found significantly correlated with tempo and

social tempo i.e. lability.

In conclusion, intermeasure correlation between various dimensions of WCST

was found significantly correlated, but a few dimensions of WCST correlate to some

extent only with Lability of STQ. So, it may be concluded that nervous system properties

have a little relationship with set/task switching and they are independent from each

other.


11/14



References

Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set:

Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),

Attention and performance XV (pp. 421-452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Barcelo & Knight (2002). Both random and perspective errors underlie WCST

deficits in Prefrontal patients.Neuropsychologia, 40, 349-356.

Cepeda, N.J., Kramer, & Gonzalez de Sather, J.C.M. (2001). Changes in

executive control across the life span: Examination of task-switching

performance.Developmental Psychology, 37, 715-730.

Chelune, G.J., & Baer, R.A. (1986). Developmental norms for the Wisconsin

Card Sorting Test.Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 8, 219-

228.

Crone, E. A., Rtdderinkhof, K.R., Worm, M., Somsen, R.J.M., & Van der Molen,

M.W. (2004). Switching between spatial stimulus-response mappings: A

developmental study of cognitive flexibility.Developmental Science,7, 443-455.

Crone, E.A., Bunge, S.A., Van der Molen, M.W., & Ridderinkhof, K.R. (2006).

Switching between tasks and responses: A developmental study. Developmental

Science, 9, 278-287.

Crone, E.A., Rtdderinkhof, K.R., Worm, M., Somsen, R.J.M., & Van der Molen,

M.W. (2004).Switching between spatial stimulus-response mappings: A

developmental study of cognitive flexibility.Developmental Science,7, 443-455.

De Jong, R. (2000). An intention-activation account of residual switch costs. In S.

Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Cognitive control

(pp. 357-376). Cambridge.

Eysenck, H. J. (1966). Conditioning, introversion-extraversion and the strength ofnervous system.Paper presented at the meeting of the International Congress of

Psychology, Moscow, SU.


12/14



Eysenck, H. J., & Levey, A. (1972). Conditioning, introversion-extraversion and

the strength of the nervous system. In V. D. Nebylistyn, & J. A. Gray. Biological

bases of individual behavior. (206-220). New York: Academic Press.

Grey, J. (1964).Pavlovs Typology. (Oxford: Permagon press).

Huizinga, M., & Van der Molen, M.W. (2007). Age group differences in set

switching and set-maintenance on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Task.

Developmental Neuropsychology, 31 (2), 193-215.

Huizinga, M., & Van der Molen, M.W. (2007). Age-related changes in switching

from color to shape, and from stopping to going. Manuscript submitted for

Publication.

Johnson, C. D. (2008). Set switching and learning transfer. Psychology honors

thesis: Georgia State University.

Kohli & Kaur. (2006). Wisconsin card sorting test: normative data and

experience.Indian Journal of Psychology, 48, 181-184.

Kolesnikov, M. S. (1953).Material on the description of the weak type of nervous

system. Turdy Instituta Fiziolog ii im. I. p. Pavlova, 2,120-135 (in Russian).

Krausky, V.K. (1963). Methods of evaluation of nervous processes in dogs.

Journal of higher Nervous Activity, 13.

Kray, J., Eber, J., & Lindenberger, U. (2004). Age differences in executive

functioning across the life span: The role of verbalization in task preparation.Acta

Psychologica,115, 143-165.

Krusinsky, L. V. (1947). Inheritance of passive-defensive behavior as connected

with types of nervous system in the dog. Turdy Instituta Fiziologii im. I. p.

Pavlova, 1,39-62. (in Russian).

Letho, J.H. (2004). A test for childrens goal directed behavior: A pilot study.

Perceptual & Motor Skills, 98, 223-236.

Mangan, G.L. (1967b). The relation of neo-Pavlovian properties of higher

nervous activity and Western personality dimensions: IV. A factor analytic study

of extraversion and flexibility and the sensitivity and mobility of nervous system.

Journal of Experimental Research in Personality, 2, 124-127.


13/14



Nebilitcyn, V. D. (1976). Psyhophysiologicheskie Issledovaniay Individualnih

Razlichii [Psychophysiological research of individual differences]. Moscow:

Nauka.

Nebylitsyn, V.D. (1959). Investigation of the Connection between Sensitivity and

Strength of the Nervous System.In Teplov, B. M. (Ed.), Typological Features of

Higher Nervous Activity in Man, Vol. 1. RSFSR Academy of Pedagogical

Sciences, Moscow.

Neisser, U., (1967). Cognitive Psychology.Appleton, New York.

Pati, P. and Dash, A. S. (1990). Effect of grade, sex and achievement level on

intelligence, incidental memory and stroop scores.Psychological Studies, 35, 36-

40.

Pavlov, I. P. (1952). Twentyfive years of objective study of higher activity in

animals. Warszawa: Panstwowy Zaklad Wydawnictw Lekarskich.

Rathee, N., Singh, R. (2001). Mobility or/and lability of the nervous processes as

temperamental trait(s).Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 1091-1104.

Ravizza & Carter. (2008). Shifting set about task switching: Behavioral and

neural evidence for distinct forms of cognitive flexibility. Neuropsychologia,46,

2924-2935.

Rogers, R.D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple

cognitive tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 124, 207-231.

Rusalov, V. M. (1989). Object-related and communicative aspects of human

temperament: a new questionnaire of the structure of temperament. Personality

and Individual Differences,10, 817-827.

Sechenov, I.M. (1965).Reflexes of the Brain(trans. S. Belsky) p. 54. Mass: The

M. I.T. Press, Cambridge.

Setchenov, I. M. (1866, 2007). Reflexi Golovnogo Mozga [Reflexes of the brain].A. Golovachevs typography.

Slough, C., Brebner, J., Nettlebeck, T., & Cooper, C. J. ( 1996). The relationship

between intelligence, personality and inspection time. British Journal of

Psychology, 87, 255-268.


14/14



Smirnov, A., Leontev, A., Rubinstein, S., & Teplov, B. M. ( Eds.) (1966).

Psychologia. Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe , Warszawa ( in Russian).

Srivastava, R. (1976). Personality types, reversal shifts and different amount of

training trails.Indian Journal of Behavior, 1, 9-11.

Strelau J. 1998.Temperament: A Psychological Perspective. Plenum Press: New

York.

Strelau, J. (1987). The concept of temperament in personality research. European

journal of Personality, 1, 107-117.

Strelau, J., Angleitner, A., Bantelmann, J. and Ruch, W. (1990). The Strelau

Temperament Inventory-Revised (STI-R): theoretical considerations and scale

development.European Journal of Personality, 4: 209-235.

Stroop, John Ridley (1935). "Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions".

Journal of Experimental Psychology18 (6): 643662.

Teplov, B. M. (1955a). Uchenie o tipah visshei nervnoi deyatelnosti e psyhologya

[The study of the Higher Nervous system activity and psychology]. Voprosi

Psyhologii, 1, 3641.

Teplov, B. M. (1955b). O ponyatiyah slabosti i inertnosti nervnoi sistemi [About

the weakness and inertness of nervous system]. Voprosi psihologii, 6, 315.

Teplov, B. M. (1995). On notions of weakness and inertness of the nervous

system. Vop. Psikhol., No. 6.

Welsh, M.C., Pennington, B.F., & Groisser, D.B. (1991). A normative

developmental study of executive function: A window on perceptual function in

children.Developmental Neuropsychology, 7, 131-149.
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Stroop/http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Stroop/

cognitive set- switching and nervous system properties (nsps)

Documents