Abstract
In this dual-task study, we applied both cross-talk logic and locus-of-slack logic to test whether participants can retrieve semantic categories in Task 2 in parallel to Task 1 bottleneck processing. Whereas cross-talk logic can detect parallel memory retrieval only in conditions of categorical overlap between tasks, the locus-of-slack approach is independent of such restrictions. As was expected, using the cross-talk logic, we found clear evidence for parallel retrieval of semantic categories when there was categorical overlap between tasks (Experiment 1). Locus-of-slack-based evidence for parallel semantic retrieval was found, however, both in conditions with (Experiment 1) and in those without (Experiment 2) categorical overlap between tasks. Crucially, however, increasing the demand for resources required to switch from Task 1 to Task 2 eliminated even the locus-ofslack-based evidence for parallel memory retrieval during the psychological refractory period (Experiment 3). Together, our results suggest that parallel retrieval is not bound to conditions of categorical overlap between tasks but, instead, is contingent upon resources needed for switching between tasks (e.g., Oriet, Tombu, & Jolicoeur, 2005).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allport, D. A., Styles, E. A., &Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umiltà & M. Moscovitch (Eds.),Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
Allport, D. A., &Wylie, G. (2000). Task-switching, stimulus—response bindings, and negative priming. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.),Control of cognitive processes: Attention and performance XVII (pp 357–376). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
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 & Performance,31, 749–761.
Baddeley, A., Lewis, V., Eldridge, M., &Thomson, N. (1984). Attention and retrieval from long-term memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,113, 518–540.
Bargh, J. A., &Ferguson, M. J. (2000). Beyond behaviorism: On the automaticity of higher mental processes.Psychological Bulletin,126, 925–945.
Brysbaert, M. (1995). Arabic number reading: On the nature of the numerical scale and the origin of phonological recoding.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 434–452.
Byrne, M. D., &Anderson, J. R. (2001). Serial modules in parallel: The psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing.Psychological Review,108, 847–869.
Carrier, L. M., &Pashler, H. (1995). Attentional limits in memory retrieval.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1339–1348.
Craik, F. I. M., Govoni, R., Naveh-Benjamin, M., &Anderson, N. D. (1996). The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes in human memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,125, 159–180.
Dehaene, S., &Akhavein, R. (1995). Attention, automaticity, and levels of representation in number processing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 314–326.
Dehaene, S., Dupoux, E., &Mehler, J. (1990). Is numerical comparison digital? Analogical and symbolic effects in two-digit number comparison.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,16, 626–641.
Duncan, J. (1979). Divided attention: The whole is more than the sum of its parts.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,5, 216–228.
Ferguson, M. J., &Bargh, J. A. (2004). How social perception can automatically influence behavior.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,8, 33–39.
Fischer, R., & Schubert, T. (in press). Valence processing bypassing the response selection bottleneck? Evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm.Experimental Psychology.
Hazeltine, E., Teague, D., &Ivry, R. (2002). Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection after practice.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 527–545.
Hein, G., &Schubert, T. (2004). Aging and input processing in dualtask situations.Psychology & Aging,19, 416–432.
Henik, A., &Tzelgov, J. (1982). Is three greater than five: The relation between physical and semantic size in comparison tasks.Memory & Cognition,10, 389–395.
Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus—response translation in dualtask performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1368–1384.
Hommel, B., &Eglau, B. (2002). Control of stimulus—response translation in dual-task performance.Psychological Research,66, 260–273.
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory & Language,30, 513–541.
Jolicoeur, P., Tombu, M., Oriet, C., &Stevanovski, B. (2002). From perception to action: Making the connection—a tutorial. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.),Attention and performance XIX: Common mechanisms in perception and action (pp 558–586). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lawson, R., Humphreys, G. W., &Jolicoeur, P. (2000). The combined effects of plane disorientation and foreshortening on picture naming: One manipulation or two?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 568–581.
Levy, J., &Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,27, 862–869.
Lien, M. C., &Proctor, R. W. (2000). Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1260–1280.
Lien, M. C., &Proctor, R. W. (2002). Stimulus—response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: Implications for response selection.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 212–238.
Liepelt, R. (2006).Learning mechanisms enabling perfect time-sharing in dual tasks. Aachen: Shaker.
Logan, G. D., &Delheimer, J. A. (2001). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: II. Episodic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 668–685.
Logan, G. D., &Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations.Psychological Review,108, 393–434.
Logan, G. D., &Schulkind, M. D. (2000). Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,26, 1072–1090.
Luria, R., &Meiran, N. (2003). Online order control in the psychological refractory paradigm period.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 556–574.
Martin, D. W., &Kelly, R. T. (1974). Secondary task performance during directed forgetting.Journal of Experimental Psychology,103, 1074–1079.
McCann, R. S., &Johnston, J. C. (1992). Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,18, 471–484.
Meyer, D. E., &Kieras, D. E. (1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Pt. 1. Basic mechanisms.Psychological Review,104, 3–65.
Meyer, D. E., &Kieras, D. E. (1997b). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Pt. 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena.Psychological Review,104, 749–791.
Miller, J. (2006). Backward crosstalk effects in psychological refractory period paradigms: Effects of second-task response types on firsttask response latencies.Psychological Research,70, 484–493.
Miller, J., &Alderton, M. (2006). Backward response-level crosstalk in the psychological refractory period paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,32, 149–165.
Miller, J., &Reynolds, A. (2003). The locus of redundant-targets and nontargets effects: Evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 1126–1142.
Moscovitch, M. (1992). A neuropsychological model of memory and consciousness. In L. R. Squire & N. Butters (Eds.),Neuropsychology of memory (2nd ed., pp. 5–22). New York: Guilford.
Moyer, R. S., &Landauer, T. K. (1967). Time required for judgements of numerical inequality.Nature,215, 1519–1520.
Naveh-Benjamin, M., Craik, F. I. M., Perretta, J. G., &Tonev, S. T. (2000). The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes: The resiliency of retrieval processes.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,53A, 609–625.
Navon, D., &Miller, J. (1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 435–448.
Navon, D., &Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion.Cognitive Psychology,44, 193–251.
Oberauer, K., &Kliegl, R. (2004). Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,30, 689–707.
Oriet, C., Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2005). Symbolic distance affects two processing loci in the number comparison task.Memory & Cognition,33, 913–926.
Park, D. C., Smith, A. D., Dudley, W. N., &Lafronza, V. N. (1989). Effects of age and a divided attention task presented during encoding and retrieval on memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 1185–1191.
Pashler, H. [E.] (1984). Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 358–377.
Pashler, H. [E.] (1994). Graded capacity-sharing in dual-task interference?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 330–342.
Pashler, H. E. (1998).The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pashler, H. [E.], & Johnston, J. C. (1989). Chronometric evidence for central postponement in temporally overlapping tasks.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,41A, 19–45.
Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., &Klein, R. M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origins and significance.Psychological Review,83, 157–171.
Rogers, R. D., &Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 207–231.
Rohrer, D. (1996). On the relative and absolute strength of a memory trace.Memory & Cognition,24, 188–201.
Rohrer, D., &Wixted, J. T. (1994). An analysis of latency and interresponse time in free recall.Memory & Cognition,22, 511–524.
Schubert, T. (1999). Processing differences between simple and choice reactions affect bottleneck localization in overlapping tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,25, 1–18.
Schubert, T., Fischer, R., & Stelzel, C. (in press). Response activation in overlapping tasks and the response selection bottleneck.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance.
Schuch, S., &Koch, I. (2004). The costs of changing the representation of action: Response repetition and response—response compatibility in dual tasks.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,30, 566–582.
Schumacher, E. H., Seymour, T. L., Glass, J. M., Lauber, E. J., Kieras, D. E., &Meyer, D. E. (2001). Virtually perfect time-sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck.Psychological Science,121, 101–108.
Sudevan, P., &Taylor, D. A. (1987). The cuing and priming of cognitive operations.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13, 89–103.
Szameitat, A. J., Schubert, T., Müller, K., &von Cramon, D. Y. (2002). Localization of executive functions in dual-task performance with fMRI.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,14, 1184–1199.
Todorov, A., &Uleman, J. S. (2002). Spontaneous trait inferences are bound to actors’ faces: Evidence from a false recognition paradigm.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,83, 1051–1065.
Todorov, A., &Uleman, J. S. (2003). The efficiency of binding spontaneous trait inferences to actors’ faces.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,39, 549–562.
Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2002). All-or-none bottleneck versus capacity sharing accounts of the psychological refractory period phenomenon.Psychological Research,66, 274–286.
Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,29, 3–18.
Tombu, M., &Jolicoeur, P. (2005). Testing the predictions of the central capacity sharing model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,31, 790–802.
Uleman, J. S. (1999). Spontaneous versus intentional inferences in impression formation. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.),Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp 141–160). New York: Guilford.
Welford, A. T. (1952). An apparatus for use in studying serial performance.American Journal of Psychology,65, 91–97.
Woodward, T. S., Meier, B., Tipper, C., &Graf, P. (2003). Bivalency is costly: Bivalent stimuli elicit cautious responding.Experimental Psychology,50, 233–238.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This study was supported by a research grant of the G. A. Lienert Foundation to R.F., by a grant from the Marsden Fund administered by the Royal Society of New Zealand, and by a grant of the German Research Foundation to T.S.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fischer, R., Miller, J. & Schubert, T. Evidence for parallel semantic memory retrieval in dual tasks. Memory & Cognition 35, 1685–1699 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193502
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193502