Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect?

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 25, Issue 5, 1999, Pages 1268-1283

  Van Selst, Mark ^a   Ruthruff, Eric ^b   Johnston, James C ^b  

^a SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HEARING; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; RESPONSE TIME; SPEECH;

HUMANS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PITCH PERCEPTION; REFRACTORY PERIOD, PSYCHOLOGICAL; SPEECH;

EID: 0033212643     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.25.5.1268     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Allport, D. A. (1980). Attention and performance. In G. Claxton (Ed.), Cognitive psychology: New directions (pp. 112-153). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
2. Allport, D. A., Antonis, B., & Reynolds, P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 225-235.
3. Bertelson, P., & Tisseyre, F. (1969). Refractory period of c-reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79, 122-128.
4. Borger, R. (1963). The refractory period and serial choice reactions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15, 1-12.
5. Craik, K. W. (1947). Theory of the human operator in control systems: I. The operator as an engineering system. British Journal of Psychology, 38, 56-61.
6. Craik, K. W. (1948). Theory of the human operator in control systems: II. Man as an element in a control system. British Journal of Psychology, 38, 142-148.
7. Davis, R. (1956). The limits of the "psychological refractory period." Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 8, 24-38.
8. Davis, R. (1957). The human operator as a single channel information system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 9, 119-129.
9. De Jong, R. (1993). Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 965-989.
10. Dutta, A., & Walker, B. N. (1995, November). Persistence of the PRP effect: Evaluating the response-selection bottleneck. Poster presented at the 36th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los Angeles, CA.
11. Fagot, C., & Pashler, H. (1992). Making two responses to a single object: Implications for the central attentional bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1058-1079.
12. Fletcher, B. C., & Rabbitt, P. M. A. (1978). The changing pattern of perceptual analytic strategies and response selection with practice in a two-choice reaction time task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 30, 417-427.
13. Franz, E. A., Eliassen, J. C., Ivry, R. B., & Gazzaniga, M. S. (1996). Dissociation of spatial and temporal coupling in the bimanual movements of callosotomy patients. Psychological Science, 7, 306-310.
14. Franz, E. A., Zelaznik, H. N., & McCabe, G. (1991). Spatial topological constraints in a bimanual task. Acta Psychologica, 77, 137-141.
15. Gottsdanket, R. (1979). A psychological refractory period or an unprepared period? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 208-215.
16. Gottsdanker, R., & Stelmach, G. E. (1971). The persistence of psychological refractoriness. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 301-312.
17. Gottsdanker, R., & Way, T. C. (1966). Varied and constant intersignal intervals in psychological refractoriness. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72, 792-804.
18. Greenwald, A. (1972). On doing two things at once: Time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52-57.
19. Greenwald, A., & Shulman, H. G. (1973). On doing two things at once: II. Elimination of the psychological refractory period effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 70-76.
20. Halliday, A. M., Kerr, M., & Elithorn, A. (1959). Grouping of stimuli and apparent exceptions to the psychological refractory period. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 72-89.
21. Hick, W. E. (1948). The discontinuous function of the human operator in pursuit tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1, 36-51.
22. Hirst, W., Spelke, E. S., Reaves, C. C., Caharack, G., & Neisser, U. (1980). Dividing attention without alternation or automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 98-117.
23. Johnston, J. C., & Delgado, D. F. (1993, November). Bypassing the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task performance. Paper presented to the 34th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.
24. Johnston, J. C., McCann, R. S., & Remington, R. W. (1995). Chronometric evidence for two types of attention. Psychological Science, 6, 365-369.
25. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
26. Karlin, L. (1959). Reaction time as a function of foreperiod duration and variability. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 185-191.
27. Karlin, L., & Kestenbaum, R. (1968). Effects of number of alternatives on the psychological refractory period. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 20, 167-178.
28. Keele, S. (1973). Attention and human performance. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear.
29. Kerr, B. (1983). Preplanning for aimed movements: Disruptions from a preliminary task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 596-606.
30. McCann, R. S., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 471-484.
31. McLeod, P., & Hume, M. (1994). Overlapping mental operations in serial performance with preview: Typing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 193-199.
32. McLeod, P., & Posner, M. I. (1984). Privileged loops from percept to act. In H. Bourma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and performance X (pp. 55-66). London: Erlbaum.
33. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory phenomena. Psychological Review, 107, 749-791.
34. Mowbray, G. H., & Rhoades, M. V. (1959). On the reduction of choice reaction times with practice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1-36.
35. Newell, K. M. (1985). Coordination, control, and skill. In D. Goodman, R. B. Wilberg, & I. M. Franks (Eds.), Differing perspectives in motor learning, memory, and control (pp. 295-317). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
36. Norman, D. A., & Shallice, T. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In R. J. Davidson, G. E. Schwartz, & D. Shapiro (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation (Vol. 4, pp. 1-18). New York: Plenum Press.
37. Pashler, H. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 358-377.
38. Pashler, H. (1990). Do response modality effects support multiprocessor models of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 826-842.
39. Pashler, H. (1992). Dual-task interference and elementary mental mechanisms. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV (pp. 245-264). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
40. Pashler, H. (1994a). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
41. Pashler, H. (1994b). Graded capacity-sharing in dual-task interference? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 330-342.
42. Pashler, H. (1994c). Overlapping mental operations in serial performance with preview. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 161-191.
43. Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: I. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 20-32.
44. Pashler, H., Carrier, M., & Hoffman, J. (1993). Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 51-82.
45. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 19-45.
46. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155-189). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
47. Reynolds, D. (1964). Effects of double stimulation: Temporary inhibition of response. Psychological Bulletin, 62, 333-347.
48. Rieck, A. M., Ogden, G. D., & Anderson, N. S. (1980). An investigation of varying amounts of component-task practice on dual-task performance. Human Factors, 22, 373-384.
49. Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., & Van Selst, M. (in press). Why practice reduces dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
50. Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H., & Klaassen, A. (1998). Processing bottlenecks in dual-task performance: Structural limitation or strategic postponement? Unpublished manuscript.
51. Schumacher, E. H., Glass, J. M., Lauber, E. J., Gmeindl, L., Woodside, B. J., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (1996, November). Concurrent response-selection processes in multiple task performance. Poster presented at the 37th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Chicago, IL.
52. Schvaneveldt, R. W. (1969). Effects of complexity in simultaneous reaction time tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 289-296.
53. Schweickert, R., & Boggs, G. J. (1984). Models of central capacity and concurrency. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 28, 223-281.
54. Shaffer, L. H. (1975). Multiple attention in continuous verbal tasks. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Domic (Eds.), Attention and performance V (pp. 157-167). San Diego: Academic Press.
55. Smith, M. C. (1967a). The psychological refractory period as a function of performance on a first task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 19, 350-352.
56. Smith, M. C. (1967b). Theories of the psychological refractory period. Psychological Bulletin, 67, 202-213.
57. Smith, M. C. (1969). The effect of varying information on the psychological refractory period. Acta Psychologica, 30, 220-231.
58. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. Acta Psychologica, 30, 276-315.
59. Telford, C. W. (1931). Refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1-35.
60. Tuller, B., & Kelso, J. A. S. (1989). Environmentally-specified patterns of movement coordination in normal and split-brain subjects. Experimental Brain Research, 75, 306-316.
61. Van Seist, M., & Johnston, J. C. (1997). Dual-task interference when a response is not required. In M. G. Shafto & P. Langley (Eds.), Proceedings of the nineteenth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 787-792). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
62. Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 631-650.
63. Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1997). Decision and response. Cognitive Psychology, 33, 266-307.
64. Vidulich, M. A. (1988). Speech responses and dual-task performance: Better time-sharing or asymmetric transfer? Human Factors, 30, 517-529.
65. Welford, A. T. (1959). Evidence of a single-channel decision mechanism limiting performance in a serial reaction task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 193-210.
66. Welford, A. T. (1976). Skilled performance: Perceptual and motor skills. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
67. Welford, A. T. (1980). The single-channel hypothesis. In A. T. Welford (Ed.), Reaction time (pp. 215-252) New York: Academic Press.
68. Wickens, C. D. (1991). Processing resources in attention. In D. L. Damos (Ed.), Multiple-task performance (pp. 3-34). London: Taylor & Francis.
69. Williams, L. R. T. (1974). Effects of number of alternatives on the psychological refractoriness of an extended movement. Journal of Motor Behavior, 6, 227-234.