Is the psychological refractory period effect for ideomotor compatible tasks eliminated by speed-stress instructions?

It has been argued that the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect is eliminated with two ideomotor compatible tasks when instructions stress fast and simultaneous responding. Three experiments were conducted to test this hypothesis. In all experiments, Task 1 required spatially compatible manual responses (left or right) to the direction of an arrow, and Task 2 required saying the name of the auditory letter A or B. In Experiments 1 and 3, the manual responses were keypresses made with the left and right hands, whereas in Experiment 2 they were left–right toggle-switch movements made with the dominant hand. Instructions that stressed response speed reduced reaction time and increased error rate compared to standard instructions to respond fast and accurately, but did not eliminate the PRP effect on Task 2 reaction time. These results imply that, even when response speed is emphasized, ideomotor compatible tasks do not bypass response selection.

[1]  H. Pashler.  The Psychology of Attention , 1997 .

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

[3]  A. Greenwald.  A reminder about procedures needed to reliably produce perfect timesharing: comment on Lien, McCann, Ruthruff, and Proctor (2005). , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  David E. Meyer,et al.  Dual-Task Interference and Elementary Mental Mechanisms , 1993 .

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

[6]  Eric Ruthruff,et al.  Dual-task performance with ideomotor-compatible tasks: is the central processing bottleneck intact, bypassed, or shifted in locus? , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[7]  Robert W Proctor,et al.  Still no evidence for perfect timesharing with two ideomotor-compatible tasks: a reply to Greenwald (2003). , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  R. Proctor,et al.  Ideomotor compatibility in the psychological refractory period effect: 29 years of oversimplification. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[9]  Pierre Jolicoeur,et al.  Virtually no evidence for virtually perfect time-sharing. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[11]  A. Greenwald,et al.  On doing two things at once. II. Elimination of the psychological refractory period effect. , 1973, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[13]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: has the bottleneck been eliminated or is it merely latent? , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[15]  E Ruthruff,et al.  Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect? , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  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 .

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

[18]  M. Posner,et al.  On the selection of signals , 1973, Memory & cognition.

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

[20]  W. G. Koster,et al.  The psychological refractory period , 1966 .

[21]  Stephen J. Boies,et al.  Components of attention. , 1971 .

[22]  Eric Ruthruff,et al.  Attentional Limitations in Doing Two Tasks at Once , 2006 .

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

[24]  T. Zandt,et al.  A comparison of two response time models applied to perceptual matching , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[25]  A. Greenwald,et al.  On doing two things at once: III. Confirmation of perfect timesharing when simultaneous tasks are ideomotor compatible. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  Philip L. Smith,et al.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. , 2004, Psychological review.

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

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

[29]  R. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: Implications for response selection , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[30]  E. Thorndike.  Ideo-motor action. , 1913 .

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

[32]  A. Greenwald,et al.  On doing two things at once: time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. , 1972, Journal of experimental psychology.

[33]  H. Heuer,et al.  Perspectives on Perception and Action , 1989 .