Working memory involvement in dual-task performance: Evidence from the backward compatibility effect

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 36, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 968-978

  Ellenbogen, Ravid ^a   Meiran, Nachshon ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LONG TERM MEMORY; MODEL; NORMAL HUMAN; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TASK PERFORMANCE; WORKING MEMORY;

HUMANS; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

EID: 46449096724     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/MC.36.5.968     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. ACH, N. (2006). On volition (T. Herz, Trans.). Retrieved September, 2006, from University of Konstanz, Cognitive Psychology Web site: www.uni-konstanz.de/kogpsych/ach.htm. (Original work published 1910)
2. BADDELEY, A. [D.] (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829-839.
3. BADDELEY, A. D., & HITCH, G. J. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 8, pp. 47-89). New York: Academic Press.
4. BYRNE, M. D., & ANDERSON, J. R. (2001). Serial modules in parallel: The psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing. Psychological Review, 108, 847-869.
5. CAESSENS, B., HOMMEL, B., REYNVOET, B., & VAN DER GOTEN, K. (2004). Backward-compatibility effects with irrelevant stimulus-response overlap: The case of the SNARC effect. Journal of General Psychology, 131, 411-425.
6. COHEN-KDOSHAY, O., & MEIRAN, N. (2007). The representation of instructions in working memory leads to autonomous response activation: Evidence from the first trials in the flanker paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1140-1154.
7. COWAN, N. (1998). Evidence against the global speed of processing theory of working memory. In M. A. Gernsbacher & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1211). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. HOMMEL, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 1368-1384.
9. HOMMEL, B. (2000). The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 247-273). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. HOMMEL, B., & EGLAU, B. (2002). Control of stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Psychological Research, 66, 260-273.
11. HÜBNER, R., & LEHLE, C. (2007). Strategies of flanker coprocessing in single and dual tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 33, 103-123.
12. JIMÉNEZ, L., & MÉNDEZ, C. (1999). Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 236-259.
13. KUNDE, W., KIESEL, A., & HOFFMANN, J. (2003). Conscious control over the content of unconscious cognition. Cognition, 88, 223-242.
14. 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.
15. LIEN, M.-C., RUTHRUFF, E., HSIEH, S., & YU, Y.-T. (2007). Parallel central processing between tasks: Evidence from lateralized readiness potentials. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 133-141.
16. 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 & Performance, 29, 692-712.
17. LOGAN, G. D. (1978). Attention in character-classification tasks: Evidence for the automaticity of component stages. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 32-63.
18. LOGAN, G. D. (1990). Repetition priming and automaticity: Common underlying mechanisms? Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1-35.
19. LOGAN, G. D. (2002). An instance theory of attention and memory. Psychological Review, 109, 376-400.
20. LOGAN, G. D., & DELHEIMER, J. A. (2001). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: II. Episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27, 668-685.
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. LURIA, R., & MEIRAN, N. (2003). Online order control in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 556-574.
24. LURIA, R., & MEIRAN, N. (2005). Increased control demand results in serial processing: Evidence from dual-task performance. Psychological Science, 16, 833-840.
25. LURIA, R., & MEIRAN, N. (2006). Dual route for subtask order control: Evidence from the psychological refractory paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 720-744.
26. MEIRAN, N., & KESSLER, Y. (2008). The task rule congruency effect in task switching reflects activated long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 137-157.
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. MILLER, J. (2006). Backward crosstalk effects in psychological refractory period paradigms: Effects of second-task response types on first-task response latencies. Psychological Research, 70, 484-493.
30. MILLER, J., & ALDERTON, M. (2006). Backward response-level crosstalk in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 32, 149-165.
31. NAVON, D., & MILLER, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 193-251.
32. PASHLER, H. [E.] (1984). Evidence against late selection: Stimulus quality effects in previewed displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 429-448.
33. PASHLER, H. [E.] (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
34. PASHLER, H. E. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. PASHLER, H. [E.], & BAYLIS, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 1. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 20-32.
36. PASHLER, H. [E.], & JOHNSTON, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. [E.] Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155-189). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
37. RATCLIFF, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446-461.
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 strategic postponement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 73-80.
40. SCHNEIDER, W., ESCHMAN, A., & ZUCCOLOTTO, A. (2002). E-Prime user's guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
41. SCHUCH, S., & KOCH, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 92-105.
42. TOMBU, M., & JOLICŒUR, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 3-18.
43. WATTER, S., & LOGAN, G. D. (2006). Parallel response selection in dual-task situations. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 254-277.
44. WOODWORTH, R. S. (1938). Experimental psychology. New York: Holt.