Response preparation and code overlap in dual tasks

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 33, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1085-1095

  Koch, Iring ^a   Prinz, Wolfgang ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN COGNITIVE AND BRAIN SCIENCES   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; ORIENTING RESPONSE; SPATIAL ORIENTATION; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VISUAL STIMULATION; HEARING; MOVEMENT PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION PERCEPTION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

EID: 33645093467     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03193215     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. ARNELL, K. M., & DUNCAN, J. (2002). Separate and shared sources of dual-task cost in stimulus identification and response selection. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 105-147.
2. AZUMA, R., PRINZ, W., & KOCH, I. (2004). Dual-task slowing and effects of cross-task compatibility. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 693-713.
3. CARRIER, L. M., & PASHLER, H. (1995). Attentional limits in memory retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1339-1348.
4. DE JONG, R., LIANG, C.-C., & LAUBER, E. (1994). Conditional and unconditional automaticity: A dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 20, 731-750.
5. DE JONG, R., & SWEET, J. B. (1994). Preparatory strategies in overlapping-task performance. Perception & Psychophysics, 55, 142-151.
6. HOMMEL, B. (1996). S-R compatibility effects without response uncertainty. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 546-571.
7. HOMMEL, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 1368-1384.
8. HOMMEL, B., MÜSSELER, J., ASCHERSLEBEN, G., & PRINZ, W. (2001). The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 24, 849-937.
9. HOMMEL, B., & PRINZ, W. (Eos.) (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
10. IVANOFF, J. (2003). On spatial response code activation in a Simon task. Acta Psychologica, 112, 157-179.
11. JOLICŒUR, P. (1999). Dual-task interference and visual encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 596-616.
12. JOLICŒUR, P., & DELL'ACQUA, R. (1998). The demonstration of short-term consolidation. Cognitive Psychology, 36, 138-202.
13. JOLICŒUR, P., & DELL'ACQUA, R. (1999). Attentional and structural constraints on visual encoding. Psychological Research, 62, 154-164.
14. JOLICŒUR, P., TOMBU, M., ORIET, C., & STEVANOVSKI, B. (2002). From perception to action: Making the connection. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance XIX (pp. 558-586). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. KOCH, I., METIN, B., & SCHUCH, S. (2003). The role of temporal uncertainty for process interference and code overlap in perception-action dual tasks. Psychological Research, 67, 244-252.
16. KOCH, I., & PRINZ, W. (2002). Process interference and code overlap in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 28, 192-201.
17. KORNBLUM, S., HASBROUCQ, T., & OSMAN, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility. A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253-270.
18. KUNDE, W., KOCH, I., & HOFFMANN, J. (2004). Anticipated action effects affect the selection, initiation, and execution of actions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, 87-106.
19. LIEN, M.-C., & PROCTOR, R. W. (2000). Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1260-1280.
20. 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.
21. LOGAN, G. D., & GORDON, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434.
22. LOGAN, G. D., & SCHULKIND, M. D. (2000). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1072-1090.
23. MEYER, D. E., & KIERAS, D. E. (1999). Précis to a practical unified theory of cognition and action: Some lessons from EPIC computational models of human multiple-task performance. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII: Cognitive regulation of performance. Interaction of theory and application (pp. 17-88). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. MÜSSELER, J., & HOMMEL, B. (1997). Blindness to response-compatible stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 23, 861-872.
25. MÜSSELER, J., & WÜHR, P. (2002). Response-evoked interference in visual encoding. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Common mechanisms in perception and action: Attention and performance XIX (pp. 520-537). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. NAVON, D., & MILLER, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 193-251.
27. PASHLER, H. (1993), Dual-task interference and elementary mental mechanisms. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 245-264). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. PASHLER, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
29. PASHLER, H. (2000). Task switching and multitask performance. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 277-307). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. SCHUBERT, T. (1999). Processing differences between simple and choice reactions affect bottleneck localization in overlapping tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 408-425.
31. SCHUCH, S., & KOCH, I. (2004). The costs of changing the representation of action: Response repetition and response-response compatibility in dual tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 566-582.
32. STEVANOVSKI, B., ORIET, C., & JOLICΠUR, P. (2002). Blinded by headlights. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 56, 65-74.
33. STEVANOVSKI, B., ORIET, C., & JOLICΠUR, P. (2003). Can blindness to response-compatible stimuli be observed in the absence of a response? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 431-440.
34. TOMBU, M., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2002). All-or-none bottleneck versus capacity sharing accounts of the psychological refractory period phenomenon. Psychological Research, 66, 274-286.
35. TOMBU, M., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 3-18.