Task Integration Facilitates Multitasking

The aim of this study was to investigate multi-task integration in a continuous tracking task. We were particularly interested in how manipulating task structure in a dual-task situation affects learning of a constant segment embedded in a pursuit-tracking task. Importantly, we examined if dual-task effects could be attributed to task integration by varying the structural similarity and difficulty of the primary and secondary tasks. In Experiment 1 participants performed a pursuit tracking task while counting high-pitched tones and ignoring low-pitched tones. The tones were either presented randomly or structurally 250 ms before each tracking turn. Experiment 2 increased the motor load of the secondary tasks by asking participants to tap their feet to the tones. Experiment 3 further increased motor load of the primary task by increasing its speed and having participants tracking with their non-dominant hand. The results show that dual-task interference can be moderated by secondary task conditions that match the structure of the primary task. Therefore our results support proposals of task integration in continuous tracking paradigms. We conclude that multi-tasking is not always detrimental for motor learning but can be facilitated through task-integration.

[1]  Michael A. Stadler,et al.  Effects of sequence length and structure on implicit serial learning , 1997 .

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

[3]  Paul J Reber,et al.  Operating characteristics of the implicit learning system supporting serial interception sequence learning. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  J. Gibson.  The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception , 1979 .

[5]  M. A. Stadler,et al.  Role of attention in implicit learning. , 1995 .

[6]  C. Shea,et al.  Surfing the Implicit Wave , 2001, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[7]  R S W Masters,et al.  Refining the continuous tracking paradigm to investigate implicit motor learning. , 2014, Experimental psychology.

[8]  L. Jiménez.  Attention and implicit learning , 2003 .

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

[10]  D. Willingham,et al.  Effect of Sex and Joystick Experience on Pursuit Tracking in Adults , 2000, Journal of motor behavior.

[11]  R. Masters,et al.  The role of working memory in motor learning and performance , 2003, Consciousness and Cognition.

[12]  H Heuer,et al.  Secondary-task effects on sequence learning , 1996, Psychological research.

[13]  I. Koch,et al.  When two actions are easier than one: how inhibitory control demands affect response processing. , 2014, Acta psychologica.

[14]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[15]  H. Pashler,et al.  Dual-task interference with equal task emphasis: Graded capacity sharing or central postponement? , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Structure of Attentional Resources , 1980 .

[17]  Peter Ford Dominey,et al.  Influences of temporal organization on sequence learning and transfer : Comments on Stadler (1995) and Curran and Keele (1993) , 1998 .

[18]  Mark R. Wilson,et al.  Using a Delphi Technique to Seek Consensus Regarding Definitions, Descriptions and Classification of Terms Related to Implicit and Explicit Forms of Motor Learning , 2014, PloS one.

[19]  Richard I. Ivry,et al.  Attention and Structure in Sequence Learning , 2004 .

[20]  M. Nissen,et al.  Attentional requirements of learning: Evidence from performance measures , 1987, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  A. Reber.  Implicit learning and tacit knowledge , 1993 .

[22]  J. Smallwood,et al.  Unaware yet reliant on attention: Experience sampling reveals that mind-wandering impedes implicit learning , 2016, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[23]  U. Mayr,et al.  Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: evidence for independent learning of spatial and nonspatial sequences. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[24]  J. Guilford,et al.  A new type of lip key , 1930 .

[25]  R W Pew,et al.  Levels of analysis in motor control. , 1974, Brain research.

[26]  Dominique Ginhac,et al.  Implicit learning of a repeated segment in continuous tracking: A reappraisal , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[27]  W. Prinz,et al.  Chapter 5 Involuntary attention , 1996 .

[28]  E. C. Poulton,et al.  THE BASIS OF PERCEPTUAL ANTICIPATION IN TRACKING , 1952 .

[29]  Dianne C. Berry,et al.  Implicit Learning , 1993 .

[30]  John P. Wann,et al.  Integration of dynamic information for visuomotor control in young adults with developmental coordination disorder , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  R. Masters.  Theoretical aspects of implicit learning in sport. , 2000 .

[32]  Peder J. Johnson,et al.  Assessing implicit learning with indirect tests: Determining what is learned about sequence structure. , 1994 .

[33]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

[34]  J. C. Johnston,et al.  How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Integration, automatization, or just stage-shortening? , 2006, Psychological research.

[35]  Mathias Hegele,et al.  Adaptation of motor control strategies to environmental cues in a pursuit-tracking task , 2013, Experimental Brain Research.

[36]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  On the fragility of skilled performance: what governs choking under pressure? , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[37]  D. Sanabria,et al.  Auditory temporal preparation induced by rhythmic cues during concurrent auditory working memory tasks. , 2015, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[38]  Tim Curran,et al.  Attentional and Nonattentional Forms of Sequence Learning , 1993 .

[39]  J. Leeds.  Attention and Motor Skill Learning , 2007 .

[40]  R. A. Schmidt,et al.  Reducing Knowledge of Results About Relative Versus Absolute Timing: Differential Effects on Learning. , 1994, Journal of motor behavior.

[41]  H. Pashler,et al.  Attention capacity and task difficulty in visual search , 2005, Cognition.

[42]  Herbert Heuer,et al.  Task integration as a factor in secondary-task effects on sequence learning , 1997 .

[43]  Yuhong Jiang,et al.  Temporal yoking in continuous multitasking. , 2015, Journal of vision.

[44]  John P Wann,et al.  Driving skills of young adults with developmental coordination disorder: regulating speed and coping with distraction. , 2011, Research in developmental disabilities.

[45]  R. Sun,et al.  The interaction of the explicit and the implicit in skill learning: a dual-process approach. , 2005, Psychological review.

[46]  R. Schmidt,et al.  VARIABILITY OF PRACTICE AND IMPLICIT MOTOR LEARNING , 1997 .

[47]  Joel M. Cooper,et al.  Hierarchical control and driving. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. General.