Are the automatic effects of instructions modulated by instructed, context-specific strategic control?

Automatic effects of instructions (AEIs) are typically reported with simple instructions that specify stimulus-response (S-R) mappings. Evidence in support of AEIs for instructions that specify more complex rules is less consistent. Here, we investigated whether instructions communicating context-specific strategic control routines designed to reduce evidence accumulation from the target stimulus can affect AEIs in the NEXT paradigm (Meiran et al., 2015). In each mini-block, participants were first instructed on the S-R mappings that should be implemented in the two GO trials at the end of the mini-block. In the intervening NEXT trials (0-3 trials), participants responded to each stimulus with the same (e.g., left) NEXT response. Importantly, the instructions also indicated the probability that each stimulus would be presented during the critical GO trials (e.g., 90% versus 10%). We reasoned that this would strategically reduce the amount of information accumulated from the target stimulus prior to selecting a response, thereby reducing the magnitude of AEIs. GO performance was modulated by the context suggesting that the strategic aspects of the instructions had been implemented. However, AEIs were broadly consistent across contexts suggesting that the adopted strategy did not affect automatic behaviour. This pattern of results was consistent across three experiments (one preregistered) suggesting that complex instructions do not automatically trigger strategic control in dynamic environments.