Action scheduling in multitasking: A multi-phase framework of response-order control

Temporal organization of human behavior is particularly important when several action requirements must be processed around the same time. A crucial challenge in such multitasking situations is to control the temporal response order. However, multitasking studies usually focus on temporal processing dynamics after a specific response order – which is usually triggered by stimulus sequence and instructions – has been determined, whereas a comprehensive study of response-order scheduling mechanisms is still lacking. Across three psychological refractory period (PRP) experiments, we examined the impact of stimulus order, response characteristics, and several other factors on response order. Crucially, we utilized a combination of effector systems (oculomotor and manual) that are known to ensure reasonable response order variability in the first place. The results suggest that – contrary to previous assumptions – bottom-up factors (e.g., stimulus order) are not the primary determinant of temporal action scheduling. Instead, we found a major influence of effector-based characteristics (i.e., oculomotor task prioritization) that could be attenuated by both instructions and changes in the task environment (providing temporally predictable input). Effects of between-task compatibility suggest that a dedicated stimulus-code comparison process precedes and affects response-order scheduling. Based on the present results and previous findings, we propose a multi-phase framework of temporal response-order control that emphasizes the extent to which cognitive control of action scheduling is dynamically adaptive to particular task characteristics.

[1]  R. D. Gordon,et al.  Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. , 2001, Psychological review.

[2]  Ritske de Jong,et al.  THE ROLE OF PREPARATION IN OVERLAPPING-TASK PERFORMANCE , 1995 .

[3]  A. Welford THE ‘PSYCHOLOGICAL REFRACTORY PERIOD’ AND THE TIMING OF HIGH‐SPEED PERFORMANCE—A REVIEW AND A THEORY , 1952 .

[4]  Roy Luria,et al.  Online order control in the psychological refractory period paradigm. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  D E Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. , 1997, Psychological review.

[6]  Nachshon Meiran,et al.  Working memory involvement in dual-task performance: Evidence from the backward compatibility effect , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[7]  Yili Liu,et al.  Queuing network modeling of the psychological refractory period (PRP). , 2008, Psychological review.

[8]  Lynn Huestegge,et al.  Sources of interference in cross-modal action: response selection, crosstalk, and general dual-execution costs , 2018, Psychological research.

[9]  A. Osman,et al.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. , 1990, Psychological review.

[10]  Eliot Hazeltine,et al.  Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection after practice. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  P. Jolicoeur,et al.  A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  G D Logan,et al.  Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: I. Semantic memory. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  R. Remington,et al.  The role of input and output modality pairings in dual-task performance: Evidence for content-dependent central interference , 2006, Cognitive Psychology.

[14]  M. Nieuwenstein,et al.  Beyond a mask and against the bottleneck: retroactive dual-task interference during working memory consolidation of a masked visual target. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[15]  D. Navon,et al.  Queuing or Sharing? A Critical Evaluation of the Single-Bottleneck Notion , 2002, Cognitive Psychology.

[16]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  On the optimality of serial and parallel processing in the psychological refractory period paradigm: Effects of the distribution of stimulus onset asynchronies , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[17]  J. Duhamel,et al.  Differential effects of parietal and frontal inactivations on reaction times distributions in a visual search task , 2012, Front. Integr. Neurosci..

[18]  Barry H. Kantowitz,et al.  The psychological refractory period effect: Only half the double-stimulation story? , 1970 .

[19]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Effects of extensive dual-task practice on processing stages in simultaneous choice tasks , 2013, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[20]  D. Navon,et al.  Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[21]  H Pashler,et al.  Processing stages in overlapping tasks: evidence for a central bottleneck. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Response grouping in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm: Models and contamination effects , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Backward crosstalk effects in psychological refractory period paradigms: effects of second-task response types on first-task response latencies , 2006, Psychological research.

[24]  Asher Cohen,et al.  Involuntary strategy-dependent dual task performance , 2011, Psychological research.

[25]  L. Huestegge,et al.  Oculomotor dominance in multitasking: mechanisms of conflict resolution in cross-modal action. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[26]  Rico Fischer,et al.  Efficient multitasking: parallel versus serial processing of multiple tasks , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[27]  Ronald Hübner,et al.  Strategic capacity sharing between two tasks: evidence from tasks with the same and with different task sets , 2009, Psychological research.

[28]  Eliot Hazeltine,et al.  Crossmodal action: modality matters , 2011, Psychological research.

[29]  B. Hommel Automatic stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[30]  L. Huestegge,et al.  Cross-modal Action Complexity: Action- and Rule-related Memory Retrieval in Dual-response Control , 2017, Front. Psychol..

[31]  Jennifer M. Glass,et al.  Virtually Perfect Time Sharing in Dual-Task Performance: Uncorking the Central Cognitive Bottleneck , 2001, Psychological science.

[32]  H. Pashler Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  Pierre Jolicœur,et al.  All-or-none bottleneck versus capacity sharing accounts of the psychological refractory period phenomenon , 2002, Psychological research.

[34]  M. Hayhoe,et al.  In what ways do eye movements contribute to everyday activities? , 2001, Vision Research.

[35]  Harold Pashler,et al.  Do response modality effects support multiprocessor models of divided attention , 1990 .

[36]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Locus of the single-channel bottleneck in dual-task interference , 1992 .

[37]  H Carnahan,et al.  The temporal organization of hand, eye, and head movements during reaching and pointing. , 1991, Journal of motor behavior.

[38]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Why practice reduces dual-task interference. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[39]  H Pashler,et al.  Making two responses to a single object: implications for the central attentional bottleneck. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[40]  G. Logan,et al.  Parallel response selection in dual-task situations , 2006, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring? , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  M. Sigman,et al.  Brain Mechanisms of Serial and Parallel Processing during Dual-Task Performance , 2008, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[43]  I. Koch,et al.  Higher-Order Cognitive Control in Dual Tasks: Evidence From Task-Pair Switching , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[44]  David E. Kieras,et al.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. , 1997 .

[45]  C. W. Telford The refractory phase of voluntary and associative responses , 1931 .

[46]  Susana Ruiz Fernández,et al.  Dual-task processing when task 1 is hard and task 2 is easy: reversed central processing order? , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[47]  Lynn Huestegge,et al.  Constraints in task-set control: modality dominance patterns among effector systems. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[48]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Eliminating dual-task costs by minimizing crosstalk between tasks: The role of modality and feature pairings , 2016, Cognition.

[49]  Christina B Reimer,et al.  The impact of free-order and sequential-order instructions on task-order regulation in dual tasks , 2018, Psychological research.

[50]  Markus Janczyk,et al.  Sequential modulation of backward crosstalk and task-shielding in dual-tasking. , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[51]  B. Hommel,et al.  Preparing for perception and action (I): The role of grouping in the response-cuing paradigm , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.

[52]  R. Walker,et al.  A model of saccade generation based on parallel processing and competitive inhibition , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[53]  I. Koch,et al.  Task switching, modality compatibility, and the supra-modal function of eye movements. , 2013, Experimental psychology.

[54]  H. Müller,et al.  Temporal-order judgment of visual and auditory stimuli: modulations in situations with and without stimulus discrimination , 2012, Front. Integr. Neurosci..

[55]  Margaret Wilson,et al.  Six views of embodied cognition , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[56]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Task-order coordination in dual-task performance and the lateral prefrontal cortex: an event-related fMRI study , 2006, Psychological research.

[57]  A. Stockman,et al.  Color and brightness encoded in a common L- and M-cone pathway with expansive and compressive nonlinearities. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[58]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Backward response-level crosstalk in the psychological refractory period paradigm. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[59]  H. Pashler,et al.  Saccadic Eye Movements and Dual-Task Interference , 1993, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[60]  G D Logan,et al.  Parallel memory retrieval in dual-task situations: II. Episodic memory. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[61]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Chronometric Evidence for Central Postponement in Temporally Overlapping Tasks , 2003 .