Top

Gepubliceerd in:

30-04-2020 | Original Article

Incremental validity of placekeeping as a predictor of multitasking

Auteurs: Alexander P. Burgoyne, David Z. Hambrick, Erik M. Altmann

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 4/2021

Abstract

Multitasking is ubiquitous in everyday life, which means there is value in developing measures that predict successful multitasking performance. In a large sample (N = 404 contributing data), we examined the predictive and incremental validity of placekeeping, which is the ability to perform a sequence of operations in a certain order without omissions or repetitions. In the context of multitasking, placekeeping should play a role in the performance of procedural subtasks and the interleaving of subtasks that interrupt each other. Regression analyses revealed that placekeeping ability accounted for 11% of the variance in multitasking performance, and had incremental validity relative to each of a diverse set of cognitive abilities (working memory capacity, fluid intelligence, perceptual speed, and crystallized intelligence). The predictive validity of placekeeping for multitasking was stable across samples of performance and robust to placekeeping practice. Broader measures of performance on our placekeeping task accounted for 21% of the variance in multitasking performance and had incremental validity relative to an estimate of psychometric g. The results provide evidence that placekeeping is a distinct cognitive ability with its own specific role to play in multitasking, and raise the possibility that measures of placekeeping ability could have utility in selecting personnel for occupations that require certain kinds of multitasking, such as interleaving of procedures.

vorige artikel Off-line learning in a rhythmic bimanual task: early feedback dependency is reduced over wakefulness

volgende artikel Parallel and serial task processing in the PRP paradigm: a drift–diffusion model approach

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

For example, if the participant performs the U, R, and A steps on successive trials, a placekeeping error occurs on the R trial, because the correct step would have been N. However, the A trial is correct, because A follows R in UNRAVEL.

Altmann, E. M., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2017). Practice increases procedural errors after task interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146, 615–620.CrossRef

Altmann, E. M., & Trafton, J. G. (2015). Brief lags in interrupted sequential performance: Evaluating a model and model evaluation method. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 79, 51–65.CrossRef

Altmann, E. M., Trafton, J. G., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2014). Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 215–226.CrossRef

Altmann, E. M., Trafton, J. G., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2017). Effects of interruption length on procedural errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 23, 216–229.PubMed

Burgoyne, A. P., Hambrick, D. Z., & Altmann, E. M. (2019). Placekeeping ability as a component of fluid intelligence: Not just working memory capacity. American Journal of Psychology, 132, 439–449.CrossRef

Carlson, R. A., & Cassenti, D. N. (2004). Intentional control of event counting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 1235–1251.PubMed

Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices Test. Psychological Review, 97, 404–431.CrossRef

Cattell, R. B. (1943). The measurement of adult intelligence. Psychological Bulletin, 40, 153–193.CrossRef

Ekstrom, R., French, J., Harman, H., & Dermen, D. (1976). Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests (Rev ed.). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Elsmore, T. F. (1994). SYNWORK1: A PC-based tool for assessment of performance in a simulated work environment. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 26, 421–426.CrossRef

Hambrick, D. Z., & Altmann, E. M. (2015). The role of placekeeping ability in fluid intelligence. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22, 1104–1110.CrossRef

Hambrick, D. Z., Altmann, E. M., & Burgoyne, A. P. (2018). A knowledge-activation approach to testing the Circumvention-of-Limits hypothesis. American Journal of Psychology, 131, 307–321.CrossRef

Hambrick, D. Z., Burgoyne, A. P., & Altmann, E. M. (2020). Intelligence and problem solving. In: R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hambrick, D. Z., Burgoyne, A. P., & Oswald, F. L. (2019). Domain-general models of expertise: The role of cognitive ability. In P. Ward, J. M. Schraagen, J. Gore, & E. Roth (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Expertise. New York: Oxford University Press.

Hambrick, D. Z., Oswald, F. L., Darowski, E. S., Rench, T. A., & Brou, R. (2010). Predictors of multitasking performance in a synthetic work paradigm. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1149–1167.CrossRef

Hambrick, D. Z., Salthouse, T. A., & Meinz, E. J. (1999). Predictors of crossword puzzle proficiency and moderators of age–cognition relations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 131–164.CrossRef

Hambrick, D. Z., Rench, T. A., Poposki, E. M., Darowski, E. S., Roland, D., Bearden, R. M., et al. (2011). The relationship between the ASVAB and multitasking in Navy Sailors: A process-specific approach. Military Psychology, 23, 365–380.

Hayes, T. R., Petrov, A. A., & Sederberg, P. B. (2015). Do we really become smarter when our fluid-intelligence test scores improve? Intelligence, 48, 1–14.CrossRef

Jensen, A. R. (2002). Psychometric g: Definition and substantiation. In The General Factor of Intelligence (pp. 51–66). Psychology Press.

König, C. J., Buhner, M., & Murling, G. (2005). Working memory, fluid intelligence, and attention are predictors of multitasking performance, but polychronicity and extraversion are not. Human Performance, 18, 243–266.CrossRef

McGrew, K. S. (2009). CHC theory and the human cognitive abilities project: Standing on the shoulders of the giants of psychometric intelligence research. Intelligence, 37, 1–10.CrossRef

National Center for O*NET Development (2019). Browse by O*NET Data. O*NET OnLine. Retrieved December 22, 2019, from https://www.onetonline.org/find/descriptor/result/1.A.1.g.2.

Raven, J., & Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales.

Reeve, C. L., & Blacksmith, N. (2009). Identifying g: A review of current factor analytic practices in the science of mental abilities. Intelligence, 37, 487–494.CrossRef

Salthouse, T. A., & Babcock, R. L. (1991). Decomposing adult age differences in working memory. Developmental Psychology, 27, 763–776.CrossRef

Schmidt, F. L., Ones, D. S., & Hunter, J. E. (1992). Personnel selection. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 627–670.CrossRef

Taylor, H. C., & Russell, J. T. (1939). The relationship of validity coefficients to the practical effectiveness of tests in selection: Discussion and tables. Journal of Applied Psychology, 23, 565–578.CrossRef

Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Psychometric Monographs, 1, 270–275.

Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 498–505.CrossRef

Wang, D. Y. D., Proctor, R. W., & Pick, D. F. (2007). Acquisition and transfer of attention allocation strategies in a multiple-task work environment. Human Factors, 49, 995–1004.CrossRef

Wiener, S., & Steinberg, E. P. (1997). Everything you need to score high on the ASVAB (15th ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Titel: Incremental validity of placekeeping as a predictor of multitasking
Auteurs: Alexander P. Burgoyne
David Z. Hambrick
Erik M. Altmann
Publicatiedatum: 30-04-2020
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 4/2021
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-020-01348-7

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2021

A gifted SNARC? Directional spatial–numerical associations in gifted children with high-level math skills do not differ from controls

Inhibitory mechanisms in motor imagery: disentangling different forms of inhibition using action mode switching

In Medio Stat Virtus: intermediate levels of mind wandering improve episodic memory encoding in a virtual environment

Local perception impairs the lexical reading route

Effort avoidance is not simply error avoidance

Functions of spontaneous and voluntary future thinking: evidence from subjective ratings