Cognitive control, essential for goal-directed behavior, is typically divided into proactive and reactive systems. Proactive control is a preparatory, anticipatory process, where individuals actively maintain goal-relevant information to optimize performance. In contrast, reactive control is a just-in-time mechanism, triggered in response to unexpected events or conflicts. Investigating the interplay between proactive and reactive control is critical, as it can illuminate how these systems co-regulate behavior and adapt to varying cognitive demands. We conducted two experiments to explore this relationship. In the first experiment, we tested for transfer effects from proactive in the color-word Stroop task to reactive control in a Gender Stroop task. Proactive control was manipulated by altering the proportion of neutral, congruent, and incongruent trials, aiming to influence the congruency sequence effect (CSE), a marker of reactive control. Despite using both a between-subject and a within-subject design, we did not observe any transfer effects, indicating that manipulating proactive control did not influence reactive adjustments in this context. In the second experiment, we examined proactive control’s influence on reactive control within a Prime-Probe Stroop task. Here, we confirmed the presence of the CSE in a Stroop paradigm free from confounds such as feature repetition and contingency learning. Notably, our findings showed that increasing proactive control led to a reduction in the CSE, suggesting that proactive engagement can attenuate reactive control processes. These results underscore the complexity of cognitive control dynamics, suggesting that while proactive and reactive systems may interact, their relationship is limited to within-task interaction.