Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 6/2011

01-11-2011 | Editorial

Crossmodal action: modality matters

Auteurs: Lynn Huestegge, Eliot Hazeltine

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 6/2011

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Excerpt

Research on multitasking harkens back to the beginnings of cognitive psychology. The central question has always been how we manage to perform multiple actions at the same time. Here, we highlight the role of specific input- and output-modalities involved in coordinating multiple action demands (i.e., crossmodal action). For a long time, modality- and content-blind models of multitasking have dominated theory, but a variety of recent findings indicate that modalities and content substantially determine performance. Typically, the term “input modality” refers to sensory channels (e.g., visual input is treated differently from auditory input), and the term “output modality” is closely associated with effector systems (e.g., hand vs. foot movements). However, this definition may be too narrow. The term “input modality” sometimes refers to a dimension within a sensory channel (e.g., shape/color in vision). Furthermore, the linkage between output-modalities and effector systems may not be specific enough to illuminate some notorious twilight zones (e.g., to distinguish between hand and wrist movements). As a consequence, we will use “modality” as an umbrella term here to capture various sources of stimulus variability used to differentiate the task-relevant information and sources of motor variability used to differentiate responses. …
Literatuur
go back to reference Allport, D. A. (1980). Attention and performance. In G. L. Claxton (Ed.), Cognitive psychology: New directions (pp. 112–153). London: Routledge. Allport, D. A. (1980). Attention and performance. In G. L. Claxton (Ed.), Cognitive psychology: New directions (pp. 112–153). London: Routledge.
go back to reference Atchley, P., Dressel, J., Jones, T., Burson, R., & Marshall, D. (2011). Talking and driving: applications of crossmodal action reveal a special role for spatial language. Psychological Research. doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0342-7 (this volume) Atchley, P., Dressel, J., Jones, T., Burson, R., & Marshall, D. (2011). Talking and driving: applications of crossmodal action reveal a special role for spatial language. Psychological Research. doi:10.​1007/​s00426-011-0342-7 (this volume)
go back to reference Bertelson, P. (1966). Central intermittency twenty years later. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 153–163.PubMedCrossRef Bertelson, P. (1966). Central intermittency twenty years later. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 153–163.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference 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 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
go back to reference Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: timesharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52–57.PubMedCrossRef Greenwald, A. G. (1972). On doing two things at once: timesharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52–57.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Greenwald, A. G., & Shulman, H. G. (1973). On doing two things at once: II. Elimination of the psychological refractory period effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 70–76.PubMedCrossRef Greenwald, A. G., & Shulman, H. G. (1973). On doing two things at once: II. Elimination of the psychological refractory period effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 70–76.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Hazeltine, E., & Ruthruff, E. (2006). Modality pairing effects and the response selection bottleneck. Psychological Research, 70, 504–513.PubMedCrossRef Hazeltine, E., & Ruthruff, E. (2006). Modality pairing effects and the response selection bottleneck. Psychological Research, 70, 504–513.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference 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., 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
go back to reference Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2009). Crosstalk between simultaneously executed saccades and manual responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 352–362.PubMedCrossRef Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2009). Crosstalk between simultaneously executed saccades and manual responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 352–362.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2010). Crossmodal action selection: Evidence from dual-task compatibility. Memory and Cognition, 38, 493–501.CrossRef Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2010). Crossmodal action selection: Evidence from dual-task compatibility. Memory and Cognition, 38, 493–501.CrossRef
go back to reference Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
go back to reference Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis of stimulus-response compatibility—A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.PubMedCrossRef Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990). Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis of stimulus-response compatibility—A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review, 97, 253–270.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Lachman, R., Butterfield, E., & Lachman, J. L. (1979). Cognitive psychology and information processing. Mahwah: Erlbaum. Lachman, R., Butterfield, E., & Lachman, J. L. (1979). Cognitive psychology and information processing. Mahwah: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 862–869.PubMedCrossRef Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 862–869.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference 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.PubMedCrossRef 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.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Navon, D. (1984). Resources–A theoretical soupstone? Psychological Review, 91, 216–234.CrossRef Navon, D. (1984). Resources–A theoretical soupstone? Psychological Review, 91, 216–234.CrossRef
go back to reference Navon, D. (1985). Attention division or attention sharing. In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 133–146). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Navon, D. (1985). Attention division or attention sharing. In M. I. Posner & O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance XI (pp. 133–146). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human information processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.CrossRef Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human information processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.CrossRef
go back to reference Navon, D., & Miller, J. (1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 435–448.PubMedCrossRef Navon, D., & Miller, J. (1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 435–448.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Neisser, U. (1967). Cognitive psychology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
go back to reference Osman, A., & Moore, C. (1993). The locus of dual-task interference: Psychological refractory effects on motor-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1292–1312.PubMedCrossRef Osman, A., & Moore, C. (1993). The locus of dual-task interference: Psychological refractory effects on motor-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 1292–1312.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Pashler, H. (1990). Do response modality effects support multiprocessor models of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 826–842.PubMedCrossRef Pashler, H. (1990). Do response modality effects support multiprocessor models of divided attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 16, 826–842.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.PubMedCrossRef Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Pashler, H., Carrier, M., & Hoffman, J. (1993). Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 51–82. Pashler, H., Carrier, M., & Hoffman, J. (1993). Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 51–82.
go back to reference Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Fencsik, D. E., Lauber, E. J., Kieras, D. E., et al. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12, 101–108.PubMedCrossRef Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Fencsik, D. E., Lauber, E. J., Kieras, D. E., et al. (2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12, 101–108.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Schumacher, E., Schwarb, H., Lightman, E., & Hazeltine, E. (2011). Investigating the modality specificity of response selection using a temporal flanker task. Psychological Research (this volume) Schumacher, E., Schwarb, H., Lightman, E., & Hazeltine, E. (2011). Investigating the modality specificity of response selection using a temporal flanker task. Psychological Research (this volume)
go back to reference Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423. 623–656. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423. 623–656.
go back to reference Smith, M. C. (1967). Theories of the psychological refractory period. Psychological Bulletin, 67, 202–213.PubMedCrossRef Smith, M. C. (1967). Theories of the psychological refractory period. Psychological Bulletin, 67, 202–213.PubMedCrossRef
go back to reference Solomons, L. M., & Stein, G. (1896). Normal motor automatism. Psychological Review, 3, 492–512.CrossRef Solomons, L. M., & Stein, G. (1896). Normal motor automatism. Psychological Review, 3, 492–512.CrossRef
go back to reference Spelke, E. S., Hirst, W., & Neisser, U. (1976). Skills of divided attention. Cognition, 4, 215–230.CrossRef Spelke, E. S., Hirst, W., & Neisser, U. (1976). Skills of divided attention. Cognition, 4, 215–230.CrossRef
go back to reference Stelzel, C., & Schubert, T. (2011). Interference effects of stimulus-response modality pairings in dual tasks and their robustness. Psychological Research. doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0368-x (this volume) Stelzel, C., & Schubert, T. (2011). Interference effects of stimulus-response modality pairings in dual tasks and their robustness. Psychological Research. doi:10.​1007/​s00426-011-0368-x (this volume)
go back to reference Stelzel, C., Schumacher, E., 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 Stelzel, C., Schumacher, E., 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
go back to reference Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1–36.CrossRef Telford, C. W. (1931). The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 1–36.CrossRef
go back to reference Welford, A. T. (1952). The “psychological refractory period” and the timing of high-speed performance—A review and a theory. British Journal of Psychology, 43, 2–19. Welford, A. T. (1952). The “psychological refractory period” and the timing of high-speed performance—A review and a theory. British Journal of Psychology, 43, 2–19.
go back to reference Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3, 159–177.CrossRef Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3, 159–177.CrossRef
go back to reference 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., & Liu, Y. (1988). Codes and modalities in multiple resources: A success and a qualification. Human Factors, 30, 599–616.PubMed
go back to reference 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 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
Metagegevens
Titel
Crossmodal action: modality matters
Auteurs
Lynn Huestegge
Eliot Hazeltine
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/s00426-011-0373-0

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2011

Psychological Research 6/2011 Naar de uitgave