English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Four experiments were conducted to identify the costs of implementing a plan in the task span procedure, which requires subjects to retrieve the task to perform on the current target from a list of planned tasks in memory. Experiment 1 compared switch costs in the task span procedure with switch costs in the explicit task-cuing procedure, which presented cues indicating the task to perform on each target. Switch costs were greater in the task span procedure. Experiments 2-4 were designed to identify the sources of this difference. Experiment 2 showed that the requirement of establishing a correspondence between the list of task names and the list of targets contributed to switch costs. Experiment 3 showed that retaining lists of similar task names produced greater switch costs than did retaining lists of dissimilar task names. Experiment 4 showed that memory load had no effect on switch costs. The results are discussed in terms of the interaction between plan-level and task-level processing in the implementation of plans.

What it costs to implement a plan: Plan-level and task-level contributions to switch costs