Localizing practice effects in dual-task performance

Practice effects on dual-task processing are of interest in current research because they may reveal the scope and limits of parallel task processing. Here we used onsets of the lateralized readiness potential (LRP), a time marker for the termination of response selection, to assess processing changes after five consecutive dual-task sessions with three stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and priority on Task 1. Practice reduced reaction times in both tasks and the interference between tasks. As indicated by the LRP, the reduction of dual-task costs can be explained most parsimoniously by a shortening of the temporal demands of central bottleneck stages, without assuming parallel processing. However, the LRP also revealed a hitherto unreported early activation over the parietal scalp after practice in the short SOA condition, possibly indicating the isolation of stimulus–response translation from other central processing stages. In addition, further evidence was obtained from the LRP for a late motoric bottleneck, which is robust against practice.

Download Full-text

Electrophysiological correlates of parallel response selection in dual-task performance

PsycEXTRA Dataset ◽

10.1037/e520592012-763 ◽

2010 ◽

Author(s):

Sandra J. Thomson ◽

Matthew T. Mazurek ◽

Judith M. Shedden ◽

Scott Watter

Keyword(s):

Task Performance ◽

Dual Task ◽

Response Selection ◽

Dual Task Performance

Download Full-text

THE INFLUENCE OF TDCS INTENSITY ON DECISION-MAKING TRAINING AND TRANSFER OUTCOMES

Journal of Neurophysiology ◽

10.1152/jn.00423.2020 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Shane E Ehrhardt ◽

Hannah L. Filmer ◽

Yohan Wards ◽

Jason B Mattingley ◽

Paul E Dux

Keyword(s):

Dual Task ◽

Reaction Times ◽

Performance Outcomes ◽

Single Task ◽

Training Performance ◽

Dual Task Performance ◽

Task Component ◽

Task Practice ◽

Task Training ◽

Performance Gains

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to improve single- and dual-task performance in healthy participants and enhance transferable training gains following multiple sessions of combined stimulation and task-practice. However, it has yet to be determined what the optimal stimulation dose is for facilitating such outcomes. We aimed to test the effects of different tDCS intensities, with a commonly used electrode montage, on performance outcomes in a multi-session single/dual-task training and transfer protocol. In a pre-registered study, 123 participants, who were pseudorandomised across four groups, each completed six sessions (pre- and post-training sessions and four combined tDCS and training sessions) and received 20 minutes of prefrontal anodal tDCS at 0.7 mA, 1.0 mA, 2.0 mA, or 15-second sham stimulation. Response time and accuracy were assessed in trained and untrained tasks. The 1.0 mA group showed substantial improvements in single-task reaction time and dual-task accuracy, with additional evidence for improvements in dual-task reaction times, relative to sham performance. This group also showed near transfer to the single-task component of an untrained multitasking paradigm. The 0.7 mA and 2.0 mA intensities varied in which performance measures they improved on the trained task, but in sum, the effects were less robust than for the 1.0 mA group and there was no evidence for the transfer of performance. Our study highlights that training performance gains are augmented by tDCS, but their magnitude and nature are not uniform across stimulation intensity.

Download Full-text

Channel Capacity and Locus of Interference under Dual Task Conditions

Perceptual and Motor Skills ◽

10.2466/pms.1978.46.2.659 ◽

1978 ◽

Vol 46 (2) ◽

pp. 659-666 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Wade R. Helm ◽

Robert P. Fishburne ◽

Wayne L. Waag

Keyword(s):

Dual Task ◽

Secondary Task ◽

Response Selection ◽

Processing System ◽

Processing Capacity ◽

Joint Function ◽

Maximum Information ◽

Attention Effect ◽

Task Processing ◽

Task Conditions

Two experiments were performed in order to determine subjects' maximum information-processing capacity under dual task conditions and to provide empirical evidence regarding the localization of the divided attention effect. The results suggest that performance on the primary task deteriorates as a joint function of both primary and secondary task processing loads. These data support the locus of interference being within the control-processing (memory-dependent) and response-selection stages of the processing system.

Download Full-text

Control of stimulus-response translation in dual-task performance

Psychological Research ◽

10.1007/s00426-002-0100-y ◽

2002 ◽

Vol 66 (4) ◽

pp. 260-273 ◽

Cited By ~ 49

Author(s):

Bernhard Hommel ◽

Beatrix Eglau

Keyword(s):

Task Performance ◽

Dual Task ◽

Stimulus Response ◽

Dual Task Performance

Download Full-text

Semantic interference is not modality specific: Evidence from sound naming with distractor pictures

10.31234/osf.io/fc923 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Stefan Wöhner ◽

Jörg D. Jescheniak ◽

Andreas Mädebach

Keyword(s):

Dual Task ◽

Response Selection ◽

Word Production ◽

Lexical Selection ◽

Semantic Interference ◽

Task Interference ◽

Central Processing ◽

Selection Mechanisms ◽

Dual Task Interference ◽

Naming Tasks

In three experiments participants named environmental sounds (e.g., the bleating of a sheep by producing the word “sheep”) in the presence of distractor pictures. In Experiment 1 we observed faster responses in sound naming with congruent pictures (e.g., sheep; congruency facilitation) and slower responses with semantically related pictures (e.g., donkey; semantic interference), each compared to unrelated pictures (e.g., violin). In Experiments 2 and 3, we replicated these effects and used a psychological refractory period approach (combining an arrow decision or letter rotation task as task 1 with sound naming as task 2) to investigate the locus of the effects. Congruency facilitation was underadditive with dual -task interference suggesting that it arises, in part, during pre-central processing stages in sound naming (i.e., sound identification). In contrast, semantic interference was additive with dual -task interference suggesting that it arises during central (or post-central) processing stages in sound naming (i.e., response selection or later processes). These results demonstrate the feasibility of sound naming tasks for chronometric investigations of word production. Furthermore, they highlight that semantic interference is not restricted to the use of target pictures and distractor words but can be observed with quite different target-distractor configurations. The experiments support the view that congruency facilitation and semantic interference reflect some general cognitive mechanism involved in word production. These results are discussed in the context of the debate about semantic-lexical selection mechanisms in word production.

Download Full-text

Auditory Warning Signals Affect Mechanisms of Response Selection

Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie) ◽

10.1027/1618-3169/a000012 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 57 (2) ◽

pp. 89-97 ◽

Cited By ~ 35

Author(s):

Rico Fischer ◽

Franziska Plessow ◽

Andrea Kiesel

Keyword(s):

Selective Attention ◽

Response Selection ◽

Reaction Times ◽

Relevant Stimulus ◽

Attention Task ◽

Stimulus Response ◽

Spatial Stimulus ◽

Direct Route ◽

Stimulus Features ◽

Indirect Route

Irrelevant tone (accessory) stimuli facilitate performance in simple and choice reaction time tasks. In the present study, we combined accessory stimulation with a selective attention paradigm in order to investigate its influence on mechanisms of response selection. In the framework of a spatial stimulus-response compatibility task (Simon task), we tested whether accessory stimuli selectively affect bottom up triggered response activation processes (e.g., direct route processing), processing of task-relevant stimulus features (indirect route processing), or both/none. Results suggest a two-component effect of accessory stimuli within this selective attention task. First, accessory stimuli increased the Simon effect due to beneficial direct route processing. Second, accessory stimuli generally decreased reaction times indicating facilitation of indirect route processing.

Download Full-text