Vanishing Dual-Task Interference after Practice: Has the Bottleneck been Eliminated or is it Merely Latent?

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 29, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 280-289

  Ruthruff, Eric ^a   Johnston, James C ^a   Van Selst, Mark ^b   Whitsell, Shelly ^a   Remington, Roger ^a  

^a NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTENTION; AUTOMATED PATTERN RECOGNITION; CLINICAL TRIAL; FOLLOW UP; HEARING; HUMAN; LEARNING; MENTAL FUNCTION; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; RECEPTIVE FIELD; RESPONSE TIME; VISION;

ATTENTION; FIELD DEPENDENCE-INDEPENDENCE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MENTAL PROCESSES; PATTERN RECOGNITION, AUTOMATED; PERCEPTUAL MASKING; PITCH PERCEPTION; PRACTICE (PSYCHOLOGY); PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; REACTION TIME; REFRACTORY PERIOD, PSYCHOLOGICAL; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 0041350330     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.2.280     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. 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.
2. Davis, R. (1957). The human operator as a single channel information system. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 9, 119-129.
3. De Jong, R. (1993). Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology; Human Perception and Performance, 19, 965-980.
4. De Jong, R. (1995). The role of preparation in overlapping-task performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48A, 2-25.
5. 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.
6. Greenwald, A. G., & 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.
7. Hazeltine, E., Teague, D., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 527-545.
8. 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.
9. Johnston, J. C., & Delgado, D. F. (1993, November). Bypassing the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task performance. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, DC.
10. Keele, S. (1973). Attention and human performance. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear.
11. Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 862-869.
12. Lien, M.-C., & Proctor, R. W. (2002). Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: Implications for response selection. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 212-238.
13. Lien, M.-C., Proctor, R. W., & Allen, P. A. (2002). Ideomotor compatibility in the psychological refractory period effect: 29 years of oversimplification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 396-409.
14. Luce, R. D. (1986). Response times. New York: Oxford University Press.
15. Mowbray, G. H., & Rhoades, M. V. (1959). On the reduction of choice reaction times with practice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1-36.
16. 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.
17. Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. C. (1991). Procedural learning: I. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 20-32.
18. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometrie evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 19-45.
19. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155-189). Hove, United Kingdom: Psychology Press.
20. Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., & Van Selst, M. A., (2001). Why practice reduces dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 3-21.
21. Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central attentional bottleneck. Psychological Science, 121, 101-108.
22. Schwarz, W., & Ischebeck, A. (2001). On the interpretation of response time vs. onset asynchrony functions: Application to dual-task and precue-utilization paradigms. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 45, 452-479.
23. Schweickert, R. (1978). A critical path generalization of the additive factor method: Analysis of a Stroop task. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 18, 105-139.
24. Shaffer, L. H. (1975). Multiple attention in continuous verbal tasks. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance V (pp. 157-167). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
25. Van Selst, M. A., Ruthruff, E., & Johnston, J. C. (1999). Can practice eliminate the Psychological Refractory Period effect? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 1268-1283.
26. Welford, A. T. (1952). The "psychological refractory period" and the timing of high-speed performance - A review and a theory. British Journal of Psychology, 43, 2-19.
27. Welford, A. T. (1976). Skilled performance: Perceptual and motor skills. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.