Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Psychological Research
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research 6/2011

01-11-2011 | Review Paper

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

Auteur: Lynn Huestegge

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
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

The present paper presents an overview of research on the role of saccades in multitasking. Multitasking is known to cause performance costs in terms of increased response times and/or error rates. However, most of the previous research on multitasking was focused on manual and vocal action demands, and the role of eye movements has been largely neglected. As a consequence, saccade execution was mainly considered with respect to its functional role in gathering new visual information (input side of information processing). However, several more recent experiments confirmed that saccades both exhibit and cause dual-task costs in the context of other actions and should thus also be regarded as a response modality (output side of information processing). Theoretical implications as well as several open issues for future research will be outlined.

vorige artikel Crossmodal action: modality matters
volgende artikel Searching working memory for the source of dual-task costs
Literatuur
  1. Allport, D. A. (1980). Attention and performance. In G. L. Claxton (Ed.), Cognitive psychology: new directions (pp. 112–153). London: Routledge.
  2. Allport, A., Styles, E. A., & Hsieh, S. (1994). Shifting intentional set: exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In C. Umilta & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV (pp. 421–452). Cambridge: MIT Press.
  3. Baker, J. T., Donoghue, J. P., & Sanes, J. N. (1999). Gaze direction modulates finger movement activation patterns in human cerebral cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 19, 10044–10052.PubMed
  4. Battaglia-Mayer, A., Archambault, P. S., & Caminiti, R. (2006). The cortical network for eye-hand coordination and its relevance to understanding motor disorders of parietal patients. Neuropsychologia, 44, 2607–2620.PubMedView Article
  5. Battaglia-Mayer, A., Ferraina, S., Mitsuda, T., Marconi, B., Genovesio, A., Onorati, P., et al. (2000). Early coding of reaching in the parietooccipital cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83, 2374–2391.PubMed
  6. Bekkering, H., Adam, J. J., Kingma, H., Huson, A., & Whiting, H. T. A. (1994). Reaction time latencies of eye and hand movements in single- and dual-task conditions. Experimental Brain Research, 97, 471–476.View Article
  7. Bekkering, H., Adam, J. J., van den Aarssen, A., Kingma, H., & Whiting, H. T. (1995). Interference between saccadic eye and goal-directed hand movements. Experimental Brain Research, 106, 475–484.View Article
  8. Bekkering, H., & Sailer, U. (2002). Commentary: coordination of eye and hand in time and space. Progress in Brain Research, 140, 365–373.PubMedView Article
  9. Boot, W. R., Kramer, A. F., Becic, E., Wiegmann, D. A., & Kubose, T. (2006). Detecting transient changes in dynamic displays: the more you look, the less you see. Human Factors, 48, 759–773.PubMedView Article
  10. Botvinick, M., Braver, T., Barch, D., Carter, C., & Cohen, J. (2001). Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. Psychological Review, 108, 624–652.PubMedView Article
  11. Broadbent, D. E. (1982). Task combination and selective intake of information. Acta Psychologica, 50, 253–290.PubMedView Article
  12. Brown, S. H., Kessler, K. R., Hefter, H., Cooke, J. D., & Freund, H.-J. (1993). Role of the cerebellum in visuomotor coordination. Experimental Brain Research, 94, 478–488.View Article
  13. Buetti, S., & Kerzel, D. (2010). Effects of saccades and response type on the Simon effect: if you look at the stimulus, the Simon effect may be gone. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63, 2172–2189.PubMedView Article
  14. Buneo, C. A., Jarvis, M. R., Batista, A. P., & Andersen, R. A. (2002). Direct visuomotor transformations for reaching. Nature, 416, 632–636.PubMedView Article
  15. Byrne, M. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Serial modules in parallel: the psychological refractory period and perfect time-sharing. Psychological Review, 108, 847–869.PubMedView Article
  16. Carbone, E., & Schneider, W. X. (2010). The control of stimulus-driven saccades is subject not to central, but to visual attention limitations. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 72, 2168–2175.
  17. Carey, D. P. (2000). Eye-hand coordination: eye to hand or hand to eye? Current Biology, 10, 416–419.View Article
  18. Crawford, J. D., Medendorp, W. P., & Marotta, J. J. (2004). Spatial transformations for eye-hand coordination. Journal of Neurophysiology, 92, 10–19.PubMedView Article
  19. Dreisbach, G., Goschke, T., & Haider, H. (2006). Implicit task sets in task switching? Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1221–1233.PubMedView Article
  20. Epelboim, J., Steinman, R. M., Kowler, E., Pizlo, Z., Erkelens, C. J., & Collewijn, H. (1997). Gaze-shift dynamics in two kinds of sequential looking tasks. Vision Research, 37, 2597–2607.PubMedView Article
  21. Evens, D. R., & Ludwig, C. J. (2010). Dual-task costs and benefits in anti-saccade performance. Experimental Brain Research, 205, 545–557.View Article
  22. Fagot, C., & Pashler, H. (1992). Making two responses to a single object: implications for the central attentional bottleneck. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 18, 1058–1079.PubMedView Article
  23. Findlay, J. M., & Gilchrist, I. D. (2003). Active vision: the psychology of looking and seeing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. 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.PubMedView Article
  25. Henderson, J. M. (2005). Human gaze control during real-world scene perception. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 498–504.View Article
  26. Herman, L. M., & Kantowitz, B. H. (1970). The psychological refractory period effect: only half the double-stimulation story? Psychological Bulletin, 73, 74–88.View Article
  27. Hodgson, T. L., Müller, H. J., & O’Leary, M. J. (1999). Attentional localization prior to simple and directed manual responses. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 308–321.View Article
  28. Hommel, B. (1998). Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 24, 1368–1384.PubMedView Article
  29. Horstmann, A., & Hoffmann, K. P. (2005). Target selection in eye-hand coordination: do we reach to where we look or do we look to where we reach? Experimental Brain Research, 167, 187–195.View Article
  30. Huestegge, L. (2010). Effects of vowel length on gaze durations in silent and oral reading. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 3(5):5, 1–18.
  31. Huestegge, L., & Adam, J. J. (2011). Oculomotor interference during manual response preparation: evidence from the response cueing paradigm. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 73, 702–707.View Article
  32. Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2009). Dual-task crosstalk between saccades and manual responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 35, 352–362.PubMedView Article
  33. Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2010a). Crossmodal action selection: evidence from dual-task compatibility. Memory and Cognition, 38, 493–501.View Article
  34. Huestegge, L., & Koch, I. (2010b). Fixation disengagement enhances peripheral perceptual processing: evidence for a perceptual gap effect. Experimental Brain Research, 201, 631–640.View Article
  35. Huestegge, L., Radach, R., Corbic, D., & Huestegge, S. M. (2009). Oculomotor and linguistic determinants of reading development: a longitudinal study. Vision Research, 49, 2948–2959.PubMedView Article
  36. Huestegge, L., Skottke, E.-M., Anders, S., Debus, G., & Müsseler, J. (2010). The development of hazard perception: dissociation of visual orientation and hazard processing. Transportation Research, 13F, 1–8.
  37. Irwin, D. E., & Thomas, L. E. (2007). The effect of saccades on number processing. Perception and Psychophysics, 69, 450–458.PubMedView Article
  38. Johansson, R. S., Westling, G., Backstrom, A., & Flanagan, J. R. (2001). Eye-hand coordination in object manipulation. The Journal of Neuroscience, 21, 6917–6932.PubMed
  39. Jonikaitis, D. & Deubel, H. (2011). Parallel and independent allocation of attention to eye and hand movement goals. Psychological Science (in press).
  40. Jonikaitis, D., Schubert, T., & Deubel, H. (2010). Preparing coordinated eye and hand movements: dual task costs are not attentional. Journal of Vision, 10(14), 1–17.View Article
  41. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329–354.PubMedView Article
  42. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
  43. Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., et al. (2010). Control and interference in task switching––a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849–874.PubMedView Article
  44. Kinsbourne, M. (1981). Single channel theory. In D. H. Holding (Ed.), Human skills (pp. 65–89). Chichester: Wiley.
  45. Kliegl, R., Nuthmann, A., & Engbert, R. (2006). Tracking the mind during reading: the influence of past, present, and future words on fixation durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 135, 12–35.PubMedView Article
  46. Koch, I. (2009). The role of crosstalk in dual-task performance: evidence from manipulating response-set overlap. Psychological Research, 73, 417–424.PubMedView Article
  47. Kunar, M. A., Carter, R., Cohen, M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2008). Telephone conversation impairs sustained visual attention via a central bottleneck. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 1135–1140.PubMedView Article
  48. Land, M. F. (2005). Eye-hand coordination learning a new trick. Current Biology, 15, 955–956.View Article
  49. Land, M. F., & Hayhoe, M. M. (2001). In what ways do eye movements contribute to everyday activities? Vision Research, 41, 3559–3565.PubMedView Article
  50. Levy, J., & Pashler, H. (2001). Is dual-task slowing instruction dependent. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 27, 862–869.PubMedView Article
  51. Levy, J., Pashler, H., & Boer, E. (2006). Central interference in driving: is there any stopping the psychological refractory period? Psychological Science, 17, 228–235.PubMedView Article
  52. Logan, G. D., & Gordon, R. D. (2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393–434.PubMedView Article
  53. Lünenburger, L., Kutz, D. F., & Hoffmann, K. P. (2000). Influence of arm movements on saccades in humans. European Journal of Neuroscience, 12, 4107–4116.PubMedView Article
  54. Malmstrom, F. V., Reed, L. E., & Weber, R. J. (1983). Saccadic eye movements during a concurrent auditory task. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 27, 31–34.
  55. Marois, R., & Ivanoff, J. (2005). Capacity limits of information processing in the brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 296–304.PubMedView Article
  56. Mather, J., & Fisk, J. (1985). Orienting to targets by looking and pointing: parallels and interactions in ocular and manual performance. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37A, 315–338.
  57. Mather, J. A., & Lackner, J. R. (1980). Visual tracking of active and passive movements of the hand. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 307–315.PubMedView Article
  58. Mather, J. A., & Putchat, C. (1983). Parallel ocular and manual tracking responses to a continuously moving visual target. Journal of Motor Behavior, 15, 29–38.PubMed
  59. McLeod, P., & Posner, M. I. (1984). Privileged loops from percept to act. In H. Bouma & D. G. Bouwhuis (Eds.), Attention and Performance X. Control of language processes (pp. 55–66), Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  60. Megaw, E. D., & Armstrong, W. (1973). Individual and simultaneous tracking of a step input by the horizontal saccadic eye movement and manual control systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 100, 18–28.PubMedView Article
  61. Meyer, D. E., & Kieras, D. W. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3–65.
  62. Miller, J. (1982). Discrete versus continuous models of human information processing: in search of partial output. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 8, 273–296.PubMedView Article
  63. Müsseler, J., Aschersleben, G., Arning, K., & Proctor, R. (2009). Reversed effects of spatial compatibility in natural scenes. American Journal of Psychology, 122, 325–336.PubMed
  64. Navon, D. (1984). Resources––A theoretical soupstone? Psychological Review, 91, 216–234.View Article
  65. 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, NJ: Erlbaum.
  66. Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human information processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.View Article
  67. Navon, D., & Miller, J. (1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 13, 435–448.PubMedView Article
  68. Navon, D., & Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing. A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cognitive Psychology, 44, 193–251.PubMedView Article
  69. Neumann, O. (1987). Beyond capacity: a functional view of attention. In H. Heuer & A. F. Sanders (Eds.), Perspectives on perception and action (pp. 361–394). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
  70. Niechwiej-Szwedo, E., McIlroy, W. E., Green, R. E. A., & Verrier, M. C. (2005). The effect of directional compatibility on the response latencies of ocular and manual movements. Experimental Brain Research, 162, 220–229.View Article
  71. Nitschke, M. F., Arp, T., Stavrou, G., Erdmann, C., & Heide, W. (2005). The cerebellum in the cerebro-cerebellar network fort he control of eye and hand movements––an fMRI study. Progress in Brain Research, 148, 151–164.PubMedView Article
  72. Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data limited and resource limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64.View Article
  73. Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.PubMedView Article
  74. Pashler, H. (1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  75. Pashler, H., Carrier, M., & Hoffman, J. (1993). Saccadic eye movements and dual-task interference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 46A, 51–82.
  76. Pelz, J., Hayhoe, M. M., & Loeber, R. (2001). The coordination of eye, head, and hand movements in a natural task. Experimental Brain Research, 139, 266–277.View Article
  77. Posner, M. I. (1980). Orienting of attention. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32, 3–25.PubMedView Article
  78. Posner, M. I., Nissen, M. J., & Ogden, W. C. (1978). Attended and unattended processing modes: the role of set for spatial location. In H. L. Pick Jr. & I. J. Saltzman (Eds.), Modes of perceiving and processing information (pp. 137–157). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
  79. Prablanc, C., Echallier, J. E., Jeannerod, M., & Komilis, E. (1979a). Optimal response of eye and hand motor systems in pointing at a visual target. II. Static and dynamic visual cues in the control of hand movement. Biological Cybernetics, 35, 183–187.PubMedView Article
  80. Prablanc, C., Echallier, J. F., Komilis, E., & Jeannerod, M. (1979b). Optimal response of eye and hand motor systems in pointing at a visual target. I. Spatio-temporal characteristics of eye and hand movements and their relationships when varying the amount of visual information. Biological Cybernetics, 35, 113–124.PubMedView Article
  81. Pratt, J., Bekkering, H., Abrams, R. A., & Adam, J. (1999). The gap effect for spatially oriented responses. Acta Psychologica, 102, 1–12.PubMedView Article
  82. Ramnani, N., Toni, I., Passingham, R. E., & Haggard, P. (2001). The cerebellum and parietal cortex play a specific role in coordination: a PET study. NeuroImage, 14, 899–911.PubMedView Article
  83. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372–422.PubMedView Article
  84. Rayner, K. (2009). Eye movements and attention in reading, scene perception, and visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1457–1506.View Article
  85. Rizzolatti, G., Riggio, L., Dascola, I., & Umilta, C. (1987). Reorienting attention across the horizontal and vertical meridians: evidence in favor of a premotor theory of attention. Neuropsychologia, 25, 31–40.PubMedView Article
  86. Roberts, R. J., Hager, L. D., & Heron, C. (1994). Prefrontal cognitive processes: working memory and inhibition in the antisaccade task. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 123, 374–393.View Article
  87. Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). The cost of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 124, 207–231.View Article
  88. Ruthruff, E., Hazeltine, E., & Remington, R. W. (2005). What causes residual dual-task interference after practice? Psychological Research, 70, 494–503.PubMedView Article
  89. Salvucci, D. D., & Taatgen, N. A. (2008). Threaded cognition: an integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. Psychological Review, 115, 101–130.PubMedView Article
  90. Saslow, M. G. (1967). Effects of components of displacement-step stimuli upon latency for saccadic eye movement. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 57, 1024–1029.PubMedView Article
  91. Schneider, W. X., & Deubel, H. (2002). Selection-for-perception and selection-for-spatial-motor-action are coupled by visual attention: a review of recent findings and new evidence from stimulus-driven saccade control. In W. Prinz & B. Hommel (Eds.), Attention and performance XIX: common mechanisms in perception and action (pp. 609–627). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  92. Shaffer, L. H. (1975). Multiple attention in continuous verbal tasks. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance V (pp. 157–167). New York: Academic Press.
  93. Sharikadze, M., Cong, D. K., Staude, G., Deubel, H., & Wolf, W. (2009). Dual-tasking: is manual tapping independent of concurrently executed saccades? Brain Research, 1283, 41–49.PubMedView Article
  94. Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions toward the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176.PubMedView Article
  95. Snyder, L. H., Batista, A. P., & Andersen, R. A. (2000). Saccade-related activity in the parietal reach region. Journal of Neurophysiology, 83, 1099–1102.PubMed
  96. Snyder, L. H., Calton, J. L., Dickinson, A. R., & Lawrence, B. M. (2002). Eye-hand coordination: saccades are faster when accompanied by a coordinated arm movement. Journal of Neurophysiology, 87, 2279–2286.PubMed
  97. Solomons, L. M., & Stein, G. (1896). Normal motor automatism. Psychological Review, 3, 492–512.View Article
  98. Spelke, E. S., Hirst, W., & Neisser, U. (1976). Skills of divided attention. Cognition, 4, 215–230.View Article
  99. Steinbach, M. J., & Held, R. (1968). Eye tracking of observer-generated target movements. Science, 161, 187–188.PubMedView Article
  100. 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.PubMedView Article
  101. Stephan, D. N., & Koch, I. (2010). Central crosstalk in task switching: Evidence from manipulating input-output modality compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1075–1081.PubMedView Article
  102. Strayer, D., Drews, F., & Johnston, W. (2003). Cell-phone induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 9, 23–32.PubMedView Article
  103. Stuyven, E., Van der Goten, K., Vandierendonck, A., Claeys, K., & Crevits, L. (2000). The effect of cognitive load on saccadic eye movements. Acta Psychologica, 104, 69–85.PubMedView Article
  104. Styles, E. A. (1997). The psychology of attention. Hove: Psychology Press.View Article
  105. Tibber, M. S., Grant, S., & Morgan, M. J. (2009). Oculomotor responses and visuospatial perceptual judgments compete for common limited resources. Journal of Vision, 9, 1–13.PubMedView Article
  106. Tombu, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (2003). A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance, 29, 3–18.PubMedView Article
  107. Vandierendonck, A., Deschuyteneer, M., Depoorter, A., & Drieghe, D. (2008). Input monitoring and response selection as components of executive control in pro-saccades and anti-saccades. Psychological Research, 72, 1–11.PubMedView Article
  108. Vidoni, E. D., McCarley, J. S., Edwards, J. D., & Boyd, L. A. (2009). Manual and oculomotor performance develop contemporaneously but independently during continuous tracking. Experimental Brain Research, 195, 611–620.View Article
  109. Ward, A. (2004). Attention: a neuropsychological approach. New York: Psychology Press.
  110. Welford, A. T. (1952). The “psychological refractory period” and the timing of high-speed performance––a review and a theory. British Journal of Psychology, 434, 2–19.
  111. Wickens, C. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
  112. Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102). Orlando: Academic Press.
  113. Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3, 159–177.View Article
  114. Wright, R. D., & Ward, L. M. (2008). Orienting of Attention. New York: Oxford University Press.
Metagegevens
Titel
The role of saccades in multitasking: towards an output-related view of eye movements
Auteur
Lynn Huestegge
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/s00426-011-0352-5

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2011

Psychological Research 6/2011 Naar de uitgave

Original Article

Are there control processes, and (if so) can they be studied?

Original Article

The role of input–output modality compatibility in task switching

Original Article

Talking and driving: applications of crossmodal action reveal a special role for spatial language

Original Article

Involuntary strategy-dependent dual task performance

Editorial

Crossmodal action: modality matters

Original Article

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