Valence Processing Bypassing the Response Selection Bottleneck?

2008 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rico Fischer ◽  
Torsten Schubert
Keyword(s):  
Dual Task ◽  
Refractory Period ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Response Selection ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
Capacity Limitations ◽  
Semantic Categories ◽  
Response Selection Bottleneck ◽  
Response Activation ◽  
Temporal Overlap

Abstract. The activation of semantic categories has often been claimed to occur in an attention-free, unconditionally automatic fashion (e.g., Bargh & Chartrand, 1999 ; Ferguson & Bargh, 2004 ). Using a dual-task procedure we tested whether the activation of valence categories is restricted by dual-task specific attentional limitations. For this reason we implemented a modified Eriksen-flanker task as Task 2 in a psychological refractory period paradigm. Participants were to judge the frequency of a tone in Task 1 and the valence of a target word in the presence of irrelevant flanker words in Task 2. Two different flanker categories ensured the activation of semantic categories instead of S-R based response activation. The most important result was an underadditive interaction between flanker congruency and the amount of temporal overlap between tasks that was independent of flanker type. Following the locus-of-slack logic, we interpret these findings as evidence for Task 2 processing parallel to bottleneck-stage processing in Task 1. This extends previous findings by showing that not only number categories ( Fischer, Schubert, & Miller, 2007 ; Oriet, Tombu, & Jolicouer, 2005 ), but also semantic valence categories can be activated despite dual-task capacity limitations.

Locus of Backward Crosstalk Effects on Task 1 in a Psychological Refractory Period Task

2014 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yao-Ting Ko ◽  
Jeff Miller
Keyword(s):  
Dual Task ◽  
Refractory Period ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Response Selection ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Standard Response ◽  
Backward Crosstalk ◽  
Selection Stage ◽  
Prp Paradigm ◽  
Response Selection Bottleneck

Our performance on a task decreases when the task is in a dual-task situation than when it is in isolation. An important experimental setting for dual-task situation is the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm, and the dual-task performance decrements in the PRP paradigm are referred to as PRP interference. The standard response-selection bottleneck (RSB) models state that the response-selection stage of the second task (T2) cannot start until the response-selection stage of the first task (T1) finishes, resulting in the PRP interference. Contrary to the prediction of RSB models, several researchers have found T2’s modulations on T1’s performance, and have suggested that T1’s selection-related processes are affected by T2’s selection-related processes, referred to as backward crosstalk effects. The locus of backward crosstalk effects is not clear, however, because RTs were measured in most previous studies. By using semantically unrelated stimuli and responses and by measuring T1’s lateralized readiness potential, we examined the locus of backward crosstalk effects. We found that the interval between T1’s stimulus onset and the stimulus-locked LRP onset was affected, suggesting T2’s response selection starts before T1’s selection is complete. The present result provided electrophysiological evidence focusing on T1’s changes in favor of the hypothesis of parallel response selection in the PRP paradigm.

Parallel Response Selection after Callosotomy

2008 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 526-540 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliot Hazeltine ◽  
Andrea Weinstein ◽  
Richard B. Ivry
Keyword(s):  
Dual Task ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Response Selection ◽  
Cognitive Architecture ◽  
Human Perception ◽  
Period Effect ◽  
Split Brain ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period Effect ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Neurologically Intact

Two studies [Ivry, R. B., Franz, E. A., Kingstone, A., & Johnston, J. C. The psychological refractory period effect following callosotomy: Uncoupling of lateralized response codes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24, 463–480, 1998; Pashler, H., Luck, S., Hillyard, S. A., Mangun, G. R., O'Brien, S., & Gazzaniga, M. S. Sequential operation of disconnected hemispheres in split-brain patients. NeuroReport, 5, 2381–2384, 1994] reported robust dual-task costs in split-brain patients even when the two tasks were associated with separate cerebral hemispheres. Although the patients failed to demonstrate specific forms of interference observed in control participants, the timing of the two responses suggested that performance was constrained such that the responses could not be initiated independently. Alternatively, the split-brain participants may have adopted a strategy in which the second response was withheld until the first was initiated. The present study revisits this phenomenon using a procedure in which the stimuli for both tasks are presented simultaneously and neither is given priority over the other. Under these conditions, neurologically intact participants show robust dual-task costs that are mediated by compatibility effects between the responses of the two hands. In contrast, the split-brain participants show greatly reduced dual-task costs and compatibility effects. The minimal dual-task costs observed in the current study indicate that previous dual-task costs in split-brain patients may be strategic, reflecting experimental instructions to prioritize one task, rather than reflect fundamental constraints of the cognitive architecture.

Multisession, Dual-Task Psychological Refractory Period Practice Benefits Older and Younger Adults Equally

2009 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 369-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip A. Allen ◽  
Eric Ruthruff ◽  
Joelle D. Elicker ◽  
Mei-Ching Lien
Keyword(s):  
Dual Task ◽  
Refractory Period ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Younger Adults

How Social and Refractory Is the Social Psychological Refractory Period?

2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (4) ◽  
pp. 273-281
Author(s):  
Peter Wühr ◽  
Herbert Heuer
Keyword(s):  
Dual Task ◽  
Refractory Period ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Explicit Instruction ◽  
Task Condition ◽  
Social Psychological ◽  
Dual Task Condition ◽  
Single Person ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Individual

Abstract. The social psychological refractory period (PRP) effect refers to an increase in RT to the second of two successive stimuli when another person responds to the first stimulus (shared dual-task condition) rather than when a single person responds to both stimuli (individual dual-task condition). We investigated (a) whether a social PRP effect would occur without explicit instruction concerning task priority and (b) whether there are crosstalk effects in the shared dual-task situation. We observed a strong PRP effect together with a small crosstalk effect in the individual dual-task condition, but in the shared dual-task condition both effects were absent. These findings suggest that the explicit instruction to perform responses in a fixed order is necessary to obtain the social PRP effect. In the individual dual-task condition, sequential processing can be seen as a means to reduce or prevent crosstalk effects, which is not necessary in the shared dual-task condition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document