Separating Limits on Preparation Versus Online Processing in Multitasking Paradigms: Evidence for Resource Models

We conducted 2 multitasking experiments to examine the finding that first-task reaction times (RTs) are slower in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm than in the prioritized processing (PP) paradigm. To see whether this difference between the 2 paradigms could be explained entirely by differences in first-task preparation, which would be consistent with the standard response selection bottleneck (RSB) model for multitasking interference, we compared the size of this difference for trials in which a second-task stimulus actually occurred against the size of the difference for trials without any second-task stimulus. The slowing of first-task RTs in the PRP paradigm relative to the PP paradigm was larger when the second-task stimulus appeared than when it did not, indicating that the difference cannot be explained entirely by between-paradigm differences in first-task preparation. Instead, the results suggest that the slowing of first-task RTs in the PRP paradigm relative to the PP paradigm is partly because of differences between paradigms in the online reallocation of processing capacity to tasks. Thus, the present results provide new evidence supporting resource models over the RSB model.

[1]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Motor Limitation in Dual-Task Processing Under Ballistic Movement Conditions , 2006, Psychological science.

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

[3]  W. Prinz,et al.  Response preparation and code overlap in dual tasks , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[4]  Richard B. Ivry,et al.  Task switching and multitask performance. , 2000 .

[5]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Control and interference in task switching--a review. , 2010, Psychological bulletin.

[6]  Wilfried Kunde,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : Learning , Memory , and Cognition Exceptions to the PRP Effect ? A Comparison of Prepared and Unconditioned Reflexes , 2014 .

[7]  R. Ulrich,et al.  Determinants of Central Processing Order in Psychological Refractory Period Paradigms: Central Arrival Times, Detection Times, or Preparation? , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  The locus of temporal preparation effects: Evidence from the psychological refractory period paradigm , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

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

[10]  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.

[11]  Anthony N. Carlsen,et al.  Evidence for a response preparation bottleneck during dual-task performance: effect of a startling acoustic stimulus on the psychological refractory period. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[12]  R. C. Oldfield.  THE ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS OF HANDEDNESS , 1971 .

[13]  Harold Pashler,et al.  Task prioritisation in multitasking during driving: opportunity to abort a concurrent task does not insulate braking responses from dual‐task slowing , 2008 .

[14]  Robert Gottsdanker,et al.  21 The Ubiquitous Role of Preparation , 1980 .

[15]  Geri Gay,et al.  The laptop and the lecture: The effects of multitasking in learning environments , 2003, J. Comput. High. Educ..

[16]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  Attention and performance. , 2001, Annual review of psychology.

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

[18]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[19]  D. Navon.  Resources—a theoretical soup stone? , 1984 .

[20]  Ritske De Jong,et al.  The Role of Preparation in Overlapping-task Performance , 1995, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[21]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  On the limits of advance preparation for a task switch: do people prepare all the task some of the time or some of the task all the time? , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[22]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Control of stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance , 2002, Psychological research.

[23]  Rolf Ulrich,et al.  Motor limitation in dual-task processing with different effectors , 2008, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[24]  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.

[25]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  On the importance of Task 1 and error performance measures in PRP dual-task studies , 2015, Front. Psychol..

[26]  G. Logan,et al.  On the ability to inhibit thought and action: general and special theories of an act of control. , 2014, Psychological review.

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

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

[29]  Dario D. Salvucci,et al.  Threaded cognition: an integrated theory of concurrent multitasking. , 2008, Psychological review.

[30]  Paul Bertelson,et al.  Refractory period of c-reactions , 1969 .

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

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

[33]  Wilfried Kunde,et al.  Who is talking in backward crosstalk? Disentangling response- from goal-conflict in dual-task performance , 2014, Cognition.

[34]  Jeff Miller,et al.  Locus of backward crosstalk effects on task 1 in a psychological refractory period task. , 2014, Experimental psychology.

[35]  R. Jong,et al.  Preparatory strategies in overlapping-task performance , 1994, Perception & psychophysics.

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

[37]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Response activation in overlapping tasks and the response-selection bottleneck. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[39]  H. Pashler,et al.  Graded capacity-sharing in dual-task interference? , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[41]  Gernot Horstmann,et al.  The psychological refractory period of stopping. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[42]  R W Proctor,et al.  Multiple spatial correspondence effects on dual-task performance. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[45]  Moritz Durst,et al.  A comparison of the psychological refractory period and prioritized processing paradigms: Can the response-selection bottleneck model explain them both? , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[46]  Rico Fischer,et al.  Predicting high levels of multitasking reduces between-tasks interactions. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[48]  Iring Koch,et al.  The role of crosstalk in dual-task performance: evidence from manipulating response-code overlap , 2009, Psychological research.

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

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

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

[52]  Moritz Durst,et al.  “Just do it when you get a chance”: the effects of a background task on primary task performance , 2014, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

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

[54]  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.

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