Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 689-707

  Oberauer, Klaus ^a   Kliegl, Reinhold ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF POTSDAM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MEMORY; REACTION TIME; TIME;

COGNITION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MEMORY; REACTION TIME; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 3242789477     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.30.4.689     Document Type: Article

References (56)

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. Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
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. Carrier, L. M., & Pashler, H. (1995). Attentional limits in memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 1339-1348.
5. Cohen, J. D., Dunbar, K., & McClelland, J. L. (1990). On the control of automatic processes: A parallel distributed processing account of the Stroop effect. Psychological Review, 97, 332-361.
6. Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-185.
7. Craik, F. I. M., Govoni, R., Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Anderson, N. D. (1996). The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes in human memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 159-180.
8. Crebolder, J. M., Jolicoeur, P., & McIlwaine, J. D. (2002). Loci of signal probability effects and of the attentional blink bottleneck, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28, 695-716.
9. Damos, D. L. (1991). Multiple-task performance. London: Taylor & Francis.
10. De Jong, R. (1993). Multiple bottlenecks in overlapping task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 965-980.
11. Garavan, H. (1998). Serial attention within working memory. Memory & Cognition, 26, 263-276.
12. Gopher, D. (1993). The skill of attention control: Acquisition and execution of attention strategies. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 299-322). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Halford, G. S., Wilson, W. H., & Phillips, S. (1998). Processing capacity defined by relational complexity: Implications for comparative, developmental, and cognitive psychology. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21, 803-864.
14. 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.
15. Heil, M., Wahl, K., & Herbst, M. (1999). Mental rotation, memory scanning, and the central bottleneck, Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung, 62, 48-61.
16. Hirst, W., Spelke, E., Reaves, C., Caharack, G., & Neisser, U. (1980). Dividing attention without alternation or automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 98-117.
17. Jersild, A. T. (1927). Mental set and shift. Archives of Psychology, 14(Whole No. 89).
18. Jolicoeur, P., & Dell'Acqua, R. (1998). The demonstration of short-term consolidation. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 138-202.
19. Kieras, D. A., Meyer, D. E., Ballas, J. A., & Lauber, E. (2000). Modern computational perspectives on executive mental processes and cognitive control: Where to from here? In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 681-712). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Kramer, A. F., Larish, J. F., & Strayer, D. L. (1995). Training for attentional control in dual task settings: A comparison of young and old adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 50-76.
21. Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 862-869.
22. Logan, G. D. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492-527.
23. Logan, G. D., & Delheimer, J. A. (2001). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: II. Episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 668-685.
24. Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434.
25. 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.
26. Mayr, U., & Kliegl, R. (2000). Task-set switching and long-term memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1124-1140.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. Meyer, D. E., Kieras, D. E., Lauber, E., Schumacher, E. H., Glass, J., Zurbriggen, E., et al. (1995). Adaptive executive control: Flexible multiple-task performance without pervasive immutable response-selection bottlenecks. Acta Psychologica, 90, 163-190.
30. Navon, D. (1984). Resources - A theoretical soup stone? Psychological Review, 91, 216-234.
31. Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214-255.
32. Navon, D., & Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion, Cognitive Psychology, 44, 193-251.
33. Nino, R. S., & Rickard, T. C. (2003). Practice effects on two memory retrievals from a single cue, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 373-388.
34. Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44-64.
35. Oberauer, K. (2002). Access to information in working memory: Exploring the focus of attention, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 411-421.
36. Oberauer, K. (2003). Selective attention to elements in working memory. Experimental Psychology, 50, 257-269.
37. Oberauer, K., & Kliegl, R. (2001). Beyond resources: Formal models of complexity effects and age differences in working memory. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 13, 187-215.
38. Pashler, H. (1994a). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
39. Pashler, H. (1994b). Graded capacity-sharing in dual-task interference? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 330-342.
40. Pashler, H. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
41. 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.
42. Pashler, H., Johnston, J. C., & Ruthruff, E. (2000). Attention and performance. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 629-651.
43. 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.
44. Ruthruff, E., Johnston, J. C., Van Selst, M., Whitsell, S., & Remington, R. (2003). Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: Has the bottle-neck been eliminated or is it merely latent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 280-289.
45. Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H., & Klaassen, A. (2001). Processing bottlenecks in dual-task performance: Structural limitation or strategic postponement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 73-80.
46. Salthouse, T. A., Babcock, R. L., & Shaw, R. J. (1991). Effects of adult age on structural and operational capacities in working memory. Psychology and Aging, 6, 118-127.
47. Schumacher, E. H., Lauber, E. J., Glass, J. M., Zurbriggen, 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.
48. 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, 101-109.
49. 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). New York: Academic Press.
50. Shiffrin, R. M., & Schneider, W. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127-190.
51. Tombu, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 3-18.
52. Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1994). Can mental rotation occur before the dual-task bottleneck? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20, 905-921.
53. 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.
54. 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.
55. Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. S. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239-257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. Zbrodoff, N. J. (1995). Why is 9 + 7 harder than 2 + 3? Strength and interference as explanations of the problem-size effect. Memory & Cognition, 23, 689-700.