Dual-task performance with ideomotor-compatible tasks: Is the central processing bottleneck intact, bypassed, or shifted in locus?

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 122-144

  Lien, Mei Ching ^a,c   McCann, Robert S ^a   Ruthruff, Eric ^a   Proctor, Robert W ^b  

^a NASA AMES RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; BRAIN; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; RESPONSE TIME;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; BRAIN; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; REFRACTORY PERIOD, PSYCHOLOGICAL;

EID: 14544280677     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.1.122     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Bertelson, P. (1967). The refractory period of choice reactions with regular and irregular interstimuli intervals. Acta Psychologica, 27, 45-56.
2. Brebner, J. (1977). The search for exceptions to the psychological refractory period. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI (pp. 63-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Byrne, M. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Serial modules in parallel: The psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing. Psychological Review, 108, 847-869.
4. De Jong, R. (1995). The role of preparation in overlapping-task performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 48(A), 2-25.
5. Duncan, J. (1977). Response selection rules in spatial choice reaction tasks. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and performance VI(pp. 49-61). Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Gottsdanker, R. (1980). The ubiquitous role of preparation. In G. E. Stelmach & J. Requin (Eds.), Tutorials in motor behavior (Vol. 3, pp. 355-370). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
7. Gottsdanker, R., & Stelmach, G. E. (1971). The persistence of psychological refractoriness. Journal of Motor Behavior, 3, 301-312.
8. Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: Time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52-57.
9. Greenwald, A. G. (2003). On doing two things at once: III. Confirmation of perfect timesharing when simultaneous tasks are ideomotor compatible. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 859-868.
10. Greenwald, A. G. (2004). On doing two things at once: IV. Necessary and sufficient conditions: Rejoinder to Lien, Proctor, and Ruthruff (2003). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 632-636.
11. 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.
12. Hazeltine, E., Teague, D., & Ivry, R. B. (2002). Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection after practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 527-545.
13. Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1368-1384.
14. Hommel, B., Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 849-937.
15. 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.
16. Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 862-869.
17. Lien, M.-C., & Proctor, R. W. (2000). Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1260-1280.
18. Lien, M.-C., & Proctor, R. W. (2002). Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: Implications for response selection. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 212-238.
19. 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.
20. Lien, M.-C., Proctor, R. W., & Ruthruff, E. (2003). Still no evidence for perfect timesharing with two ideomotor-compatible tasks: A reply to Greenwald (2003). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 1267-1272.
21. Lien, M.-C., Schweickert, R., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 692-712.
22. Logan G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434.
23. Logan, G. D., & Schulkind, M. D. (2000). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 26, 1072-1090.
24. 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.
25. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3-65.
26. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997b). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. Psychological Review, 104, 749-791.
27. Pashler, H. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 358-377.
28. Pashler, H. (1993). Dual-task interference and elementary mental mechanisms. In D. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 245-264). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
30. Pashler, H. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Pashler, H., & Baylis, G. C. (1991). Procedural learning: 2. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 33-48.
32. Pashler, H., Carrier, M., & Hoffman, J. (1993). Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 46(A), 51-82.
33. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 41(A), 19-45.
34. Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155-189). Hove, England: Psychology Press.
35. Pashler, H., & O'Brien, S. (1993). Dual-task interference and the cerebral hemispheres. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 315-330.
36. Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., & Van Selst, M. (2001). Why practice reduces dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 3-21.
37. Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., Van Selst, M., Whitsell, S., & Remington, R. (2003). Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: Has the bottleneck been eliminated or is it merely latent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 280-289.
38. Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H. E., & Hazeltine, E. (2003). Dual-task interference with equal task emphasis: Graded capacity-sharing or central postponement? Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 801-816.
39. Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H. E., & Klaassen, A. (2001). Processing bottlenecks in dual-task performance: Structural limitation or voluntary postponement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 73-80.
40. Ruthruff, E., Van Selst, M., Johnston, J. C., & Remington, R. W. (in press). How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Stage-shortening, automatization, or integration? Psychological Research.
41. Schumacher, E. H., Lauber, E. J., Glass, J. M., Zurbruggen, E. L., Gmeindl, L., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (1999). Concurrent response-selection processes in dual-task performance: Evidence for adaptive executive control of task scheduling. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 791-814.
42. Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Fencsik, D. E., Lauber, E. J., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12, 101-108.
43. Shin, Y.-K., Cho, Y.-S., Lien, M.-C., & Proctor, R. W. (2005). Is the psychological refractory period effect for ideomotor compatible tasks eliminated by speed-emphasis instructions? Manuscript submitted for publication.
44. Smith, M. C. (1967). Stimulus-response compatibility and parallel response selection. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 21, 496-503.
45. Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1-36.
46. Van Selst, M., & Jolicœur, P. (1997). Decision and response. Cognitive Psychology, 33, 266-307.
47. Van Selst, M., 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.
48. Way, T. C., & Gottsdanker, R. (1968). Psychological refractoriness with varying differences between tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 78, 38-45.
49. 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.