How two share two tasks: evidence of a social psychological refractory period effect

A strong assumption shared by major theoretical approaches to cognition posits that the human cognitive system has a limited capacity for information processing. Evidence supporting this claim comes from the dual-task paradigm in which one cognitive system has to process two tasks simultaneously. In this study, we examined whether bottleneck-like processing can also be elicited when a dual task is shared between two individuals. Under dual-task instructions giving priority to Task 1, we found evidence of a psychological refractory period effect in dual-task and joint-task conditions. Under equal priority instructions, we replicated the finding of a psychological refractory period effect in the dual-task, but not in the joint-task condition. These findings are in line with the assumption that a social psychological refractory period effect can be induced across two individuals. We suggest that this effect is due to task-specific monitoring requirements. We discuss our findings with respect to both dual-task and joint action theories.

[1]  W. Prinz,et al.  Trial-to-trial sequential dependencies in a social and non-social Simon task , 2011, Psychological research.

[2]  Marcel Brass,et al.  What is matched in direct matching? Intention attribution modulates motor priming. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  W. Prinz.  Perception and Action Planning , 1997 .

[4]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Improved Intertask Coordination after Extensive Dual-Task Practice , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[5]  Richard L. Lewis,et al.  Rational adaptation under task and processing constraints: implications for testing theories of cognition and action. , 2009, Psychological review.

[6]  S. Dehaene.  Varieties of numerical abilities , 1992, Cognition.

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

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

[9]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  Cognitive regulation of performance : interaction of theory and application , 1999 .

[10]  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 .

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

[12]  David E. Kieras,et al.  Précis to a practical unified theory of cognition and action: Some lessons from EPIC computational models of human multiple-task performance , 1997 .

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

[14]  W. Prinz,et al.  How two share a task: corepresenting stimulus-response mappings. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[15]  C W Eriksen,et al.  Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[16]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article Social Neuroscience Action Co-representation: the Joint Snarc Effect Action Co-representation: the Joint Snarc Effect , 2022 .

[17]  W. Prinz,et al.  Compatibility between Observed and Executed Finger Movements: Comparing Symbolic, Spatial, and Imitative Cues , 2000, Brain and Cognition.

[18]  Torsten Schubert,et al.  Practice-related reduction of dual-task costs under conditions of a manual-pedal response combination , 2011 .

[19]  E. Lauber,et al.  Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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

[22]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  The Virtual Co-Actor: The Social Simon Effect does not Rely on Online Feedback from the Other , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[23]  W. Prinz,et al.  Representing others' actions: just like one's own? , 2003, Cognition.

[24]  W. James,et al.  The Principles of Psychology. , 1983 .

[25]  E. Lauber,et al.  Conditional and unconditional automaticity: a dual-process model of effects of spatial stimulus-response correspondence. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

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