Tactile stimuli increase effects of modality compatibility in task switching

Experimental Psychology

Volumn 62, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 276-284

  Stephan, Denise Nadine ^a   Koch, Iring ^a  

^a RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cognitive control; Crosstalk; Modality compatibility; Tactile stimulation; Task switching; Vibrotactile stimulation

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AUDITORY STIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE;

ACOUSTIC STIMULATION; ADULT; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS;

EID: 84942912994     PISSN: 16183169     EISSN: 21905142     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000291     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Brebner, J. (1977). The search for exceptions to the psychological refractory period. In S. Dornic (Ed.), Attention and Performance VI (pp. 63-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Cole, L. (1995). Learning disabled and hearing-impaired. Independent Studies and Capstones, 348 Program in Audiology and Communication Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine. Washington, DC: University.
3. Conway, C M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2006). Modality-constrained statistical learning of tactile, visual, and auditory sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 24-39.
4. Craig, J. C., & Rollman, G. B. (1999). Somethesis. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 305-331.
5. Cybulska-Klosewicz, A., Meftah, E.-M., Raby, M., Lemieux, M.-L., & Chapman, C. E. (2011). A critical speed for gating of tactile detection during voluntary movement. Experimental Brain Research, 210, 291-301.
6. Frings, C, Bader, R., & Spence, C. (2008). Selection in touch: Negative priming with tactile stimuli. Perception and Psychophysics, 70, 516-523.
7. Greenwald, A. G. (1970). Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: With special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. Psychological Review, 77, 73-99.
8. Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: Time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52-57'.
9. Greenwald, A. G. (2003). On doing two things at once: III. Confirmation of perfect timesharing when simultaneous tasks are ideomotor compatible. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 859-868.
10. Hazeltine, E., Ruthruff, E., & Remington, R. W. (2006). The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: Evidence for content-dependent central interference. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 291-345.
11. Herwig, A., & Waszak, F. (2009). Intention and attention in ideomotor learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 219-227.
12. Hirst, W C, Neisser, U., & Spelke, E. S. (1978). Divided attention. Human Nature, 1, 54-61.
13. Huestegge, L., & Hazeltine, E. (2011). Crossmodal action: Modality matters. Psychological Research, 75, 445-451.
14. James, W (1890). Principles of psychology (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Holt.
15. Johansen-Berg, H., & Lloyd, D. M. (2000). The physiology and psychology of selective attention in touch. Frontiers in Bioscience, 5, 894-904.
16. Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching - a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849-874.
17. Koch, I. (2009). The role of crosstalk in dual-task performance: Evidence from manipulating response-set overlap. Psychological Research, 73, 417-424. doi:10.1007/s00426-008-0152-8
18. Leonard, J. A. (1959). Tactual choice reaction: I. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 11, 76-83.
19. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3-65.
20. Morley, J. W., Goodwin, A. W, & Darian-Smith, I. (1983). Tactile discrimination of gratings. Experimental Brain Research, 49, 291-299.
21. Navon, D., & Miller, J. (1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 435-448. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.13.3.435
22. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220-244.
23. Pashler, H. (1998). The Psychology of Attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Prinz, W (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9, 129-154.
25. Shin, Y K., Proctor, R. W, & Capaldi, E. J. (2010). A review of contemporary ideomotor theory. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 943-947.
26. Spelke, E. S., Hirst, W, & Neisser, U (1976). Skills of divided attention. Cognition, 4, 215-230.
27. Spence, C. (2002). Multisensory attention and tactile information-processing. Behavioral Brain Research, 135, 57-64.
28. Stephan, D. N, & Koch, I. (2010). Central cross-talk in task switching: Evidence from manipulating input-output modality compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1075-1081.
29. Stephan, D. N, & Koch, I. (2011). The role of input-output modality compatibility in task-switching. Psychological Research, 75, 491-498.
30. Stephan, D. N, Koch, I., Hendler, J., & Huestegge, L. (2013). Task switching, modality compatibility, and the supramodal function of eye movements. Experimental Psychology, 60, 90-99. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000175
31. Vandierendonck, A., Liefooghe, B., & Verbruggen, F (2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601-626.
32. Wickens, C D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239-257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63-102). New York, NY: Academic Press.
34. Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Factors, 50, 449-455.
35. Zambarbieri, D. (2002). The latency of saccades toward auditory targets in humans. In J. Hyönä, D. P. Munoz, W Heide, & R. Radach (Eds.), Progress in brain research (140, pp. 51-59). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.