Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-11-2011 | Original Article

Searching working memory for the source of dual-task costs

Auteurs: Eliot Hazeltine, Timothy Wifall

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 6/2011

Abstract

Dual-task costs depend on the specific pairings of stimulus and response modalities. Such findings are analogous to domain-specific effects in the working memory (WM) literature, in which items compete for limited capacity when they involve related types of information. The present study explicitly examines the relationship between modality-pairing effects on dual-task costs and domain-specificity effects on WM capacity. Participants maintained a sequence of either locations or tones in WM, and then performed a choice reaction time task in which they responded either vocally or manually. The stimuli for the choice reaction time task were held constant, but its response modality affected the interference observed in WM: vocal responses interfered with WM for tones and manual responses interfered with WM for locations. These findings indicate that response selection engages domain-specific WM processes and that interference within these processes may account for modality-pairing effects.

vorige artikel The role of saccades in multitasking: towards an output-related view of eye movements

volgende artikel Interference effects of stimulus–response modality pairings in dual tasks and their robustness

Anderson, J. R., Bothell, D., Byrne, M. D., Douglass, S., Lebiere, C., & Qin, Y. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111, 1036–1060.PubMedCrossRef

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.PubMedCrossRef

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Baddeley, A., Grant, S., Wight, E., & Thomson, N. (1975). Imagery and visual working memory. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and Performance (Vol. 5) (pp. 205–217). London: Academic Press.

Baddeley, A., & 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.

Baddeley, A., & Logie, R. H. (1999). Working memory: The multiple-component model. In M. Akira & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 28–61). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Cocchini, G., Logie, R. H., Della Sala, S., MacPherson, S. E., & Baddeley, A. D. (2002). Concurrent performance of two memory tasks: Evidence for domain-specific working memory systems. Memory and Cognition, 30, 1086–1095.CrossRef

Cowan, N. (2000). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87–185.CrossRef

Engle, R. W. (2002). Working memory capacity as executive attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 19–23.CrossRef

Engle, D. J., & Kane, M. J. (2004). Executive attention, working memory capacity, and a two-factor theory of cognitive control. In B. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 44) (pp. 145–199). New York: Elsevier.

Fitts, P. M., & Deininger, R. L. (1954). S–R Compatibility: Correspondence among paired elements within stimulus and response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 483–492.PubMedCrossRef

Hazeltine, E., & Ruthruff, E. (2006). Modality pairing effects and the response selection bottleneck. Psychological Research, 70, 504–513.PubMedCrossRef

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.PubMedCrossRef

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.PubMedCrossRef

Heuer, H. (1995). Models for response–response compatibility: The effects of the relation between responses in a choice task. Acta Psychologia, 90, 315–332.CrossRef

Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2010). Crossmodal action selection: Evidence from dual-task compatibility. Memory & Cognition, 38, 493–501.CrossRef

Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. W., & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354.CrossRef

Logan, G. D. (1979). On the use of a concurrent memory load to measure attention and automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 5, 189–207.CrossRef

Maquestiaux, F., Laguë-Beauvais, M., Ruthruff, E., & Bherer, L. (2008). Bypassing the central bottleneck after single-task practice in the psychological refractory period paradigm: Evidence for task automatization and greedy resource recruitment. Memory & Cognition, 37, 1262–1282.CrossRef

McCann, R. S., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 471–484.CrossRef

Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997). A computational theory of human multiple task performance: The EPIC information-processing architecture and strategic response deferment model. Psychological Review, 104, 1–65.

Navon, D. (1984). Resources—A theoretical soupstone? Psychological Review, 91, 216–234.CrossRef

Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.CrossRef

Navon, D., & Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 193–251.PubMedCrossRef

Pashler, H. (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 358–377.PubMedCrossRef

Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.PubMedCrossRef

Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 41A, 19–45.

Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H., & Hazeltine, E. (2003). Dual-task interference with equal task emphasis: Graded capacity sharing or central postponement? Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 801–816.CrossRef

Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Kieras, D. E., & Meyer, D. E. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central attentional bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12, 101–108.PubMedCrossRef

Stelzel, C., Schumacher, E. H., Schubert, T., & D’Esposito, M. (2006). The neural effect of stimulus-response modality compatibility on dual-task performance: an fMRI study. Psychological Research, 70, 514–525.PubMedCrossRef

Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. O. (2008). Response grouping in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm: Models and contamination effects. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 75–121.PubMedCrossRef

Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and Performance (Vol. VIII, pp. 239–257). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of Attention (pp. 63–102). Orlando: Academic Press.

Wickens, C. D., & Liu, Y. (1988). Codes and modalities in multiple resources: A success and a qualification. Human Factors, 30, 599–616.PubMed

Wickens, C. D., Sandry, D. L., & Vidulich, M. (1983). Compatibility and resource competition between modalities of input, central processing and output. Human Factors, 25, 227–248.PubMed

Zhao, X., Chen, A., & West, R. (2010). The influence of working memory load on the Simon effect. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 687–692.CrossRef

Titel: Searching working memory for the source of dual-task costs
Auteurs: Eliot Hazeltine
Timothy Wifall
Publicatiedatum: 01-11-2011
Uitgeverij: Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 6/2011
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-011-0343-6

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2011

The role of saccades in multitasking: towards an output-related view of eye movements

Crossmodal action: modality matters

The role of input–output modality compatibility in task switching

Investigating the modality specificity of response selection using a temporal flanker task

Interference effects of stimulus–response modality pairings in dual tasks and their robustness

Involuntary strategy-dependent dual task performance