On the importance of Task 1 and error performance measures in PRP dual-task studies

Frontiers in Psychology

Volumn 6, Issue APR, 2015, Pages

  Strobach, Tilo ^a,b   Schütz, Anja ^a   Schubert, Torsten ^a  

^a HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b Asklepios Medical School Hamburg   (Germany)

Author keywords

Capacity limitation; Central bottleneck theory; Dual tasks; Error data; PRP; Reaction times

Indexed keywords

EID: 84930628445     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16641078     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00403     Document Type: Short Survey

References (59)

1. Allen, P. A., Smith, A. F., Vires-Collins, H., and Sperry, S. (1998). The psychological refractory period: evidence for age differences in attentional time-sharing. Psychol. Aging 13, 218-229.
2. Arnell, K. M., and Duncan, J. (2002). Separate and shared sources of dual-task cost in stimulus identification and response selection. Cogn. Psychol. 44, 105-147. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0762.
3. Band, G. P. H., and van Nes, F. T. (2006). Reconfiguration and the bottleneck: does task switching affect the refractory-period effect? Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 18, 593-623. doi: 10.1080/09541440500423244.
4. Boot, W. R., Blakely, D. P., and Simons, D. J. (2011). Do action video games improve perception and cognition? Front. Psychol. 2:266. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00226.
5. Borger, R. (1963). The refractory period and serial choice-reactions. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 15, 1-12. doi: 10.1080/17470216308416546.
6. de Jong, R. (1995). Strategical determinants of compatibility effects with task uncertainty. Acta Psychol. 88, 187-207. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(94)E0067-P.
7. Gopher, D., Brickner, M., and Navon, D. (1982). Different difficulty manipulations interact differently with task emphasis: evidence for multiple resources. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 8, 146-157. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.8.1.146.
8. Greenwald, A. G. (2003). On doing two things at once: III. Confirmation of perfect timesharing when simultaneous tasks are ideomotor compatible. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 29, 859-868. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.5.859.
9. Hendrich, E., Strobach, T., Buss, M., Müller, H., and Schubert, T. (2012). Temporal-order judgment of visual and auditory stimuli: modulations in situations with and without stimulus discrimination. Front. Integr. Neurosci. 6:63. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00063.
10. Herman, L. M., and Kantowitz, B. H. (1970). The psychological refractory period effect: only half the double-stimulation story? Psychol. Bull. 73, 74-88. doi: 10.1037/h0028357.
11. Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 24, 1368-1384. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1368.
12. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and Effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
13. Kantowitz, B. H. (1978). Response conflict theory, error rates and hybrid processing: a reply to McLeod. Acta Psychol. 42, 397-403. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(78)90021-5.
14. Kantowitz, B. H., and Knight, J. L. (1974). Testing tapping time-sharing. J. Exp. Psychol. 103, 331-336. doi: 10.1037/h0036808.
15. Kantowitz, B. H., and Knight, J. L. Jr. (1976). Testing tapping timesharing, II: auditory secondary task. Acta Psychol. 40, 343-362. doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(76)90016-0.
16. Kunde, W., Landgraf, F., Paelecke, M., and Kiesel, A. (2007). Dorsal and ventral processing under dual-task conditions. Psychol. Sci. 18, 100-104.
17. Leonhard, T., and Ulrich, R. (2011). Determinants of central processing order in psychological refractory period paradigms: central arrival times, detection times, or preparation? Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 64, 2012-2043. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2011.573567.
18. Lien, M.-C., and Proctor, R. W. (2002). Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: implications for response selection. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 9, 212-238. doi: 10.3758/BF03196277.
19. Lien, M.-C., Proctor, R. W., and Allen, P. A. (2002). Ideomotor compatibility in the psychological refractory period effect: 29 years of oversimplification. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 28, 396-409. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.28.2.396.
20. Lien, M.-C., Schweickert, R., and Proctor, R. W. (2003). Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory period paradigm. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 29, 692-712. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.692.
21. Liepelt, R., Strobach, T., Frensch, P., and Schubert, T. (2011). Improved intertask coordination after extensive dual-task practice. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 64, 1251-1272. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2010.543284.
22. Logan, G. D., and Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychol. Rev. 108, 393-434. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.393.
23. Logan, G. D., and Schulkind, M. D. (2000). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 26, 1072-1090. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.26.3.1072.
24. Luria, R., and Meiran, N. (2003). Online order control in the psychological refractory period paradigm. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 29, 556. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.556.
25. Luria, R., and Meiran, N. (2005). Increased control demand results in serial processing evidence from dual-task performance. Psychol. Sci. 16, 833-840. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01622.x.
26. Luria, R., and Meiran, N. (2006). Dual route for subtask order control: evidence from the psychological refractory paradigm. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 59, 720-744. doi: 10.1080/02724980543000060.
27. Meyer, D. E., and Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. Psychol. Rev. 104, 749-791. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.104.4.749.
28. Miller, J., and Ulrich, R. (2008). Bimanual response grouping in dual-task paradigms. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 61, 999-1019. doi: 10.1080/17470210701434540.
29. Navon, D., and Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychol. Rev. 86, 214-255. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.86.3.214.
30. Navon, D., and Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cogn. Psychol. 44, 193-251. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0767.
31. Norman, D. A., and Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cogn. Psychol. 7, 44-64. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-3.
32. Osman, A., and Moore, C. M. (1993). The locus of dual-task interference: psychological refractory effects on movement-related brain potentials. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percep. Perform. 19, 1292-1312.
33. Pashler, H. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: evidence for a central bottleneck. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 10, 358-377. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.10.3.358.
34. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychol. Bull. 116, 220-244. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.116.2.220.
35. Pashler, H. (2000). "Task switching and multitask performance," in Attention and Performance, XVIII: Control of Mental Processes, eds S. Monsell, and J. Driver (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
36. Pashler, H. and Johnston, J. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 41A, 19-45.
37. Pashler, H., and Johnston, J. C. (1998). "Attentional limitations in dual-task performance," in Attention, ed. H. Pashler (Psychology Press/Erlbaum (Uk) Taylor & Francis: Hove), 155-189.
38. Ruthruff, E. and Pashler, H. E. (2001). "Perceptual and central interference in dual-task performance," in Temporal Constraints on Human Information Processing, ed. K. Shapiro (New York: Oxford University Press), 100-123.
39. Schubert, T. (1996). Interference during the simultaneous performance of two tasks. Z. Exp. Psychol. 4, 625-656.
40. Schubert, T. (1999). Processing differences between simple and choice reaction affect bottleneck localization in overlapping tasks. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 25, 408-425. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.25.2.408.
41. Schubert, T. (2008). The central attentional limitation and executive control. Front. Biosci. 13, 3569-3580. doi: 10.2741/2950.
42. Schubert, T., Fischer, R., and Stelzel, C. (2008). Response activation in overlapping tasks and the response selection bottleneck. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 34, 376-397. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.376.
43. Shin, Y.-K., Cho, Y.-S., Lien, M.-C., and Proctor, R. W. (2007). Is the psychological refractory period effect for ideomotor compatible tasks eliminated by speed-emphasis instructions? Psychol. Res. 71, 553-567. doi: 10.1007/s00426-006-0066-2.
44. Sigman, M., and Dehaene, S. (2006). Dynamics of the central bottleneck: dual-task and task uncertainty. PLoS Biol. 4:e220. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0040220.
45. Strobach, T., Frensch, P. A., and Schubert, T. (2012a). Video game practice optimizes executive control skills in dual-task and task switching situations. Acta Psychol. 140, 13-24. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.001.
46. Strobach, T., Frensch, P. A., Soutschek, A., and Schubert, T. (2012b). Investigation on the improvement and transfer of dual-task coordination skills. Psychol. Res. 76, 794-811. doi: 10.1007/s00426-011-0381-0.
47. Strobach, T., Liepelt, R., Pashler, H., Frensch, P. A., and Schubert, T. (2013). Effects of extensive dual-task practice on processing stages in simultaneous choice tasks. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 75, 900-920. doi: 10.3758/s13414-013-0451-z.
48. Strobach, T., Salminen, T., Karbach, J., and Schubert, T. (2014). Practice-related optimization and transfer of executive functions: a general review and a specific realization of their mechanisms in dual tasks. Psychol. Res. 78, 836-851. doi: 10.1007/s00426-014-0563-7.
49. Szameitat, A. J., Lepsien, J., Von Cramon, D. Y., Sterr, A., and Schubert, T. (2006). Task-order coordination in dual-task performance and the lateral prefrontal cortex: an event-related fMRI study. Psychol. Res. 70, 541-552. doi: 10.1007/s00426-005-0015-5.
50. Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. J. Exp. Psychol. 14, 1-36.
51. Töllner, T., Strobach, T., Schubert, T., and Müller, H. J. (2012). The effect of task order predictability in audio-visual dual task performance: just a central capacity limitation? Front. Integr. Neurosci. 6:75. doi: 10.3389/fnint.2012.00075.
52. Tombu, M., and Jolicœur, P. (2002). All-or-none bottleneck versus capacity sharing accounts of the psychological refractory period phenomenon. Psychol. Res. 66, 274-286. doi: 10.1007/s00426-002-0101-x.
53. Tombu, M., and Jolicœur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 29, 3-18. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.29.1.3.
54. Umiltà, C., Nicoletti, R., Simion, F., Tagliabue, M. E., and Bagnara, S. (1992). The cost of a strategy. Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 4, 21-40. doi: 10.1080/09541449208406241.
55. Vince, M. (1949). Rapid response sequences and the psychological refractory period. Br. J. of Psychol. 40, 23-40.
56. Welford, A. T. (1952). The psychological refractory period and the timing of high speed performance-a review and a theory. Br. J. Psychol. 43, 2-19. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1952.tb00322.x.
57. Wickens, C. D. (1980). "The structure of attentional resources," in Attention and Performance VIII, ed. R. Nickerson (Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).
58. Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 3, 159-177. doi: 10.1080/14639220210123806.
59. Zwosta, K., Hommel, B., Goschke, T., and Fischer, R. (2013). Mood states determine the degree of task shielding in dual-task performance. Cogn. Emot. 27, 1142-1152. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2013.772047.