Telephone conversation impairs sustained visual attention via a central bottleneck

Recent research has shown that holding telephone conversations disrupts one’s driving ability. We asked whether this effect could be attributed to a visual attention impairment. In Experiment 1, participants conversed on a telephone or listened to a narrative while engaged in multiple object tracking (MOT), a task requiring sustained visual attention. We found that MOT was disrupted in the telephone conversation condition, relative to single-task MOT performance, but that listening to a narrative had no effect. In Experiment 2, we asked which component of conversation might be interfering with MOT performance. We replicated the conversation and single-task conditions of Experiment 1 and added two conditions in which participants heard a sequence of words over a telephone. In the shadowing condition, participants simply repeated each word in the sequence. In the generation condition, participants were asked to generate a new word based on each word in the sequence. Word generation interfered with MOT performance, but shadowing did not. The data indicate that telephone conversation disrupts attention at a central stage, the act of generating verbal stimuli, rather than at a peripheral stage, such as listening or speaking.

[1]  L. M. Ward,et al.  Cross-modal control of attention shifts , 1998 .

[2]  D. Strayer,et al.  Cell-Phone–Induced Driver Distraction , 2007 .

[3]  D. Strayer,et al.  Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[4]  David E. Irwin,et al.  Conversation Disrupts Change Detection in Complex Traffic Scenes , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[5]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Attentional limitations in dual-task performance. , 1998 .

[6]  Jeremy M Wolfe,et al.  Multiple object juggling: Changing what is tracked during extended multiple object tracking , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[7]  M. Masson,et al.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs , 1994, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[8]  C D Wickens,et al.  Compatibility and Resource Competition between Modalities of Input, Central Processing, and Output , 1983, Human factors.

[9]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[10]  E. Donchin,et al.  Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[11]  D. Allport,et al.  On the Division of Attention: A Disproof of the Single Channel Hypothesis , 1972, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[12]  K. Shapiro The limits of attention : temporal constraints in human information processing , 2001 .

[13]  Peter McGeorge,et al.  Multiple-Target Tracking: A Role for Working Memory? , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[14]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Driven to Distraction: Dual-Task Studies of Simulated Driving and Conversing on a Cellular Telephone , 2001, Psychological science.

[15]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[16]  R. Marois,et al.  Distinct Capacity Limits for Attention and Working Memory , 2006, Psychological science.

[17]  D G Pelli,et al.  The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: transforming numbers into movies. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[18]  Z W Pylyshyn,et al.  Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. , 1988, Spatial vision.

[19]  Karen M. Arnell Cross-modal interactions in dual-task paradigms , 2001 .

[20]  D H Brainard,et al.  The Psychophysics Toolbox. , 1997, Spatial vision.

[21]  Satoru Suzuki,et al.  Attentive tracking involves a demand-based dynamic redistribution of attention , 2007 .

[22]  Valdimar Briem,et al.  Behavioural effects of mobile telephone use during simulated driving. , 1995 .

[23]  Helga C. Arsenio,et al.  Do multielement visual tracking and visual search draw continuously on the same visual attention resources? , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[24]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  On the Economy of the Human Processing System: A Model of Multiple Capacity. , 1977 .

[25]  A. Friedman,et al.  Multiple resources in divided attention: a cross-modal test of the independence of hemispheric resources. , 1985, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Multiple resources and performance prediction , 2002 .

[27]  A. Mack Inattentional Blindness , 2003 .

[28]  E Donchin,et al.  Resource reciprocity: an event-related brain potentials analysis. , 1989, Acta psychologica.

[29]  R. Dell’Acqua,et al.  Visual encoding of patterns is subject to dual-task interference , 2000, Memory & cognition.

[30]  J. Wolfe,et al.  Tracking unique objects , 2007, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Frank Drews,et al.  A Comparison of the Cell Phone Driver and the Drunk Driver , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[32]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[33]  H Pashler,et al.  Dual-task interference and the cerebral hemispheres. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  Pierre Jolicœur,et al.  Dual-task interference and visual encoding , 1999 .

[35]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Effects of Data-Link Modality and Display Redundancy on Pilot Performance: An Attentional Perspective , 2003 .