Both congruent and incongruent trials drive the congruency sequence effect: Novel support for an episodic retrieval view of adaptive control in the prime–probe task.

The congruency effect in Stroop-like tasks-a popular measure of distraction-is smaller after incongruent relative to congruent trials. However, it is unclear whether this congruency sequence effect (CSE)-a popular index of coping with distraction-reflects adjustments of control after congruent trials, incongruent trials, or both. The episodic retrieval account of the CSE posits adjustments of control after both congruent and incongruent trials. In this account, retrieving a memory of the previous trial's congruency (i.e., congruent or incongruent) biases control processes to prepare for an upcoming trial with the same congruency (i.e., congruent or incongruent). In contrast, the default setting account posits adjustments of control after a single trial type. For example, control processes might increase inhibition of the response cued by the distractor after incongruent trials but make no adjustments after congruent trials. To distinguish between these accounts for the first time while (a) using long distractor-target intervals and (b) excluding prevalent feature integration and contingency learning confounds, we employed a confound-minimized prime-probe task with neutral trials. We usually observed adjustments of control after both trial types. Furthermore, whether the reduction of the congruency effect after incongruent trials indexed (a) inhibition of the distractor-congruent response or (b) activation of the distractor-incongruent response depended on whether the distractor and target were same-sized or different-sized, respectively. These findings favor the episodic retrieval account of the CSE over the default setting account. They also indicate that "low-level" stimulus properties may influence the nature of "high-level" control adjustments. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).