The specificity of learned parallelism in dual-memory retrieval

Memory and Cognition

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 552-569

  Strobach, Tilo ^a,b   Schubert, Torsten ^a   Pashler, Harold ^c   Rickard, Timothy ^c  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Chunked retrieval; Cued retrieval; Dual retrieval practice; Parallel retrieval

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ASSOCIATION; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; RECALL; TASK PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; CUES; HUMANS; MENTAL RECALL; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84901024260     PISSN: 0090502X     EISSN: 15325946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/s13421-013-0382-x     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Anderson, J. R., Taatgen, N. A., & Byrne, M. D. (2005). Learning to achieve perfect timesharing: Architectural implications of Hazeltine, Teague, and Ivry (2002). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 749-761. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 31. 4. 749.
2. Fagot, C., & Pashler, H. (1992). Making two responses to a single object: Implications for the central attentional bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1058-1079. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 18. 4. 1058.
3. Farley, A. P., & Keating, G. D. (2009). Familiarity effects on lexical access during L2 word reading. In C. Brantmeier (Ed.), Crossing languages and research methods: Analyses of adult foreign language reading (pp. 31-46). Charlotte, NC: IAP.
4. Hazeltine, E., Aparicio, P., Weinstein, A., & Ivry, R. B. (2007). Configural response learning: The acquisition of a nonpredictive motor skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1451-1467. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 33. 6. 1451.
5. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 28. 3. 527.
6. Hirst, W., Spelke, E. S., Reaves, C. C., Caharack, G., & Neisser, U. (1980). Dividing attention without alteration or automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 98-117. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 109. 1. 98.
7. Jaeggi, S. M., Buschkuehl, M., Jonides, J., & Perrig, W. J. (2008). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105, 6829-6833. doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 0801268105.
8. Kamienkowski, J. E., Pashler, H., Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2011). Effects of practice on task architecture: Combined evidence from interference experiments and random-walk models of decision making. Cognition, 119, 81-95.
9. Kim, Y.-S., Park, C. H., & Wagner, R. K. (in press). Is oral/text reading fluency a "bridge" to reading comprehension? Reading and Writing. doi: 10. 1007/s11145-013-9434-7.
10. 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. doi: 10. 1037/1076-898X. 1. 1. 50.
11. Li, Y., & Wright, D. L. (2000). An assessment of the attention demands during random and blocked practice schedules. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 591-606.
12. Liepelt, R., Strobach, T., Frensch, P. A., & Schubert, T. (2011). Improved inter-task coordination after extensive dual-task practice. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 1251-1272.
13. Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393-434. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 108. 2. 393.
14. Maquestiaux, F., Hartley, A. A., & Bertsch, J. (2004). Can practice overcome age-related differences in the psychological refractory period effect? Psychology and Aging, 19, 649-667.
15. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 104. 1. 3.
16. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0033-295X. 104. 4. 749.
17. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0278-7393. 29. 3. 373.
18. Oberauer, K., & Bialkova, S. (2011). Serial and parallel processes in working memory after practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 606-614.
19. Oberauer, K., & Kliegl, R. (2004). Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 689-707. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 30. 4. 689.
20. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244. doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 116. 2. 220.
21. Pashler, H. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Rickard, T. C. (1997). Bending the power law: A CMPL theory of strategy shifts and the automatization of cognitive skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 288-311. doi: 10. 1037/0096-3445. 126. 3. 288.
23. Rickard, T. C. (2004). Strategy execution in cognitive skill learning: An item-level test of candidate models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 65-82. doi: 10. 1037/0278-7393. 30. 1. 65.
24. Rickard, T. C., & Pashler, H. (2005). A bottleneck in memory retrieval from a single cue (Center for Human Information Processing Technical Report No. 2006-01). La Jolla, CA: University of California-San Diego, Center for Human Information Processing.
25. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 29. 2. 280.
26. 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. doi: 10. 3758/BF03196141.
27. Ruthruff, E., van Selst, M., Johnston, J. C., & Remington, R. W. (2006). How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Integration, automatization, or simply stage-shortening? Psychological Research, 70, 125-142.
28. Schubert, T. (1999). Processing differences between simple and choice reactions affect bottleneck localization in overlapping tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 408-425. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 25. 2. 408.
29. Schubert, T. (2008). The central attentional limitation and executive control. Frontiers of Bioscience, 13, 3569-3580.
30. 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.
31. Sigman, M., & Dehaene, S. (2006). Dynamics of the central bottleneck: Dual-task and task uncertainty. PLoS Biology, 4, e220. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pbio. 0040220.
32. Smith, M. A., Roediger, H. L., III, & Karpicke, J. D. (in press). Covert retrieval practice benefits retention as much as overt retrieval practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. doi: 10. 1037/a0033569.
33. Sternberg, S. (1969). The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method. In W. G. Koster (Ed.), Attention and performance II (pp. 276-315). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.
34. Strobach, T., Frensch, P., Müller, H., & Schubert, T. (2012a). Age- and practice-related influences on dual-task costs and compensation mechanisms under optimal conditions for dual-task performance. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 19, 222-247. doi: 10. 1080/13825585. 2011. 630973.
35. Strobach, T., Frensch, P., Müller, H., & Schubert, T. (2012b). Testing the limits of optimizing dual-task performance in younger and older adults. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6, 39. doi: 10. 3389/fnhum. 2012. 00039.
36. Strobach, T., Frensch, P. A., Soutschek, A., & Schubert, T. (2012c). Investigation on the improvement and transfer of dual-task coordination skills. Psychological Research, 76, 794-811. doi: 10. 1007/s00426-011-0381-0.
37. Strobach, T., Liepelt, R., Schubert, T., & Kiesel, A. (2012d). Task switching: Effects of practice on switch and mixing costs. Psychological Research, 76, 74-83. doi: 10. 1007/s00426-011-0323-x.
38. Tombu, M., & Jolicœur, P. (2004). Virtually no evidence for virtually perfect time-sharing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 795-810. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 30. 5. 795.
39. Touron, D. R., & Hertzog, C. (2004). Strategy shift affordance and strategy choice in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 32, 298-310.
40. Touron, D. R., Hoyer, W. J., & Cerella, J. (2004). Cognitive skill learning: Age-related differences in strategy shifts and speed of component operations. Psychology and Aging, 19, 565-580.
41. Townsend, J. T., & Wenger, M. J. (2004). The serial-parallel dilemma: A case study in a linkage of theory and method. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 391-418. doi: 10. 3758/BF03196588.
42. 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. doi: 10. 1037/0096-1523. 25. 5. 1268.
43. Watson, J. M., & Strayer, D. L. (2010). Supertaskers: Profiles in extraordinary multitasking ability. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 479-485. doi: 10. 3758/PBR. 17. 4. 479.