Abstract
In three experiments, the authors supported the hypothesis that parallel response activation seen in dual-task performance results from holding Task 2 rules in working memory (WM) while performing Task 1. To this end, the authors used the backward compatibility effect (BCE; quicker primary responses when the Task 2 response is compatible with codes of Task 1) as a marker for parallel response activation and manipulated WM load. Increasing the number of primary task rules from two to four did not modulate BCE, replicating Hommel and Eglau (2002), but a higher load condition, involving six primary task rules, reduced the BCE to nonsignificant levels. Experiment 3 further showed that WM is loaded by rules associating abstract stimulus categories to responses, and not by rules tt associate individual stimuli to responses (S-R rules).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ach, N. (2006). On volition (T. Herz, Trans.). Retrieved September, 2006, from University of Konstanz, Cognitive Psychology Web site: www.uni-konstanz.de/kogpsych/ach.htm. (Original work published 1910)
Baddeley, A. [D.] (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4, 829–839.
Baddeley, A. D., & 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.
Byrne, M. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Serial modules in parallel: The psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing. Psychological Review, 108, 847–869.
Caessens, B., Hommel, B., Reynvoet, B., & van der Goten, K. (2004). Backward-compatibility effects with irrelevant stimulus-response overlap: The case of the SNARC effect. Journal of General Psychology, 131, 411–425.
Cohen-Kdoshay, O., & Meiran, N. (2007). The representation of instructions in working memory leads to autonomous response activation: Evidence from the first trials in the flanker paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1140–1154.
Cowan, N. (1998). Evidence against the global speed of processing theory of working memory. In M. A. Gernsbacher & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 1211). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dualtask performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 1368–1384.
Hommel, B. (2000). The prepared reflex: Automaticity and control in stimulus-response translation. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Control of cogniti processes: Attention and performance XVIII (pp. 247–273). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Hommel, B., & Eglau, B. (2002). Control of stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Psychological Research, 66, 260–273.
Hübner, R., & Lehle, C. (2007). Strategies of flanker coprocessing in single and dual tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 33, 103–123.
Jiménez, L., & Méndez, C. (1999). Which attention is needed for implicit sequence learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 236–259.
Kunde, W., Kiesel, A., & Hoffmann, J. (2003). Conscious control over the content of unconscious cognition. Cognition, 88, 223–242.
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., Ruthruff, E., Hsieh, S., & Yu, Y.-T. (2007). Parallel central processing between tasks: Evidence from lateralized readiness potentials. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 133–141.
Lien, M.-C., Schweickert, R., & Proctor, R. W. (2003). Task switching and response correspondence in the psychological refractory period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 692–712.
Logan, G. D. (1978). Attention in character-classification tasks: Evidence for the automaticity of component stages. Journal of Experimental Psychologe: General, 107, 32–63.
Logan, G. D. (1990). Repetition priming and automaticity: Common underlying mechanisms? Cognitive Psychology, 22, 1–35.
Logan, G. D. (2002). An instance theory of attention and memory. Psychological Review, 109, 376–400.
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 period paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 556–574.
Luria, R., & Meiran, N. (2005). Increased control demand results in serial processing: Evidence from dual-task performance. Psychological Science, 16, 833–840.
Luria, R., & Meiran, N. (2006). Dual route for subtask order control: Evidence from the psychological refractory paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 720–744.
Meiran, N., & Kessler, Y. (2008). The task rule congruency effect in task switching reflects activated long-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 34, 137–157.
Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. E. (1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 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: Part 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.
Navon, D., & Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 193–251.
Pashler, H. [E.] (1984). Evidence against late selection: Stimulus quality effects in previewed displays. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 10, 429–448.
Pashler, H. [E.] (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.
Pashler, H. E. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Pashler, H. [E.], & Baylis, G. (1991). Procedural learning: 1. Locus of practice effects in speeded choice tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 20–32.
Pashler, H. [E.], & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. In H. [E.] Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155–189). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446–461.
Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H. E., & Hazeltine, E. (2003). Dual-task interference with equal task emphasis: Graded capacity sharing or central postponement? Perception & Psychophysics, 65, 801–816.
Ruthruff, E., Pashler, H. E., & Klaassen, A. (2001). Processing bottlenecks in dual-task performance: Structural limitation or strategic postponement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 73–80.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools.
Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 92–105.
Tombu, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 29, 3–18.
Watter, S., & Logan, G. D. (2006). Parallel response selection in dualtask situations. Perception & Psychophysics, 68, 254–277.
Woodworth, R. S. (1938). Experimental psychology. New York: Holt.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by a research grant from the Israel Science Foundation, given to N.M.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ellenbogen, R., Meiran, N. Working memory involvement in dual-task performance: Evidence from the backward compatibility effect. Memory & Cognition 36, 968–978 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.5.968
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.5.968