Crossmodal Action 1 Crossmodal Action Selection - RWTH Aachen ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Crossmodal Action 2 Abstract Response-related mechanisms of multitasking were studied by analyzing simultaneous processing of responses in different modalities (i.e., crossmodal action). Subjects responded to a single auditory stimulus either with a saccade, a manual response (single-task conditions), or both (dual-task condition). We used a spatially incompatible stimulus-response mapping for one task but not for the other. Critically, inverting these mappings varied temporal task overlap in dual-task conditions while keeping spatial incompatibility across responses constant. Unlike previous paradigms, temporal task overlap was manipulated without utilizing sequential stimulus presentation, which might induce strategic serial processing. The results revealed dual-task costs, but these were not affected by an increase of temporal task overlap. This finding is evidence for parallel response selection in multitasking. We propose that crossmodal action is processed by a central mapping-selection mechanism in working memory, and that the dual-task costs are mainly caused by mapping-related crosstalk. Keywords: Dual-Task Interference, Task Dominance, Stimulus-Response Compatibility, Saccades, Manual Responses, Crosstalk
Crossmodal Action 3 Numerous studies demonstrated that multitasking leads to poorer performance when compared with the execution of one task alone (e.g., Pashler, 1994). Typically, multitasking research focuses on 1.) manipulating the temporal relation of two tasks by systematically varying their temporal overlap (psychological refractory period [PRP] paradigm, Welford, 1952; see Pashler, 1994, for a review), or on 2.) comparing single-task performance with performance in trials where the stimuli for both tasks are presented at the same time (dualtask paradigm; e.g., Navon & Miller, 1987). The present study combines both approaches: We utilized a single stimulus for both tasks to gain suitable control over stimulus-related processes and varied the spatial stimulus-response mappings across tasks to manipulate temporal task overlap. Using this novel experimental approach yielded evidence for parallel response selection in multitasking. In the PRP paradigm, the manipulation of stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between both tasks induces a systematic variation of temporal task overlap. As a result, more overlap (i.e., shorter SOA) leads to a prolongation of response times (RTs) in the second task, but not in the first task (i.e., the PRP effect; Welford, 1952). More specifically, at short SOAs every further decrease of SOA is associated with an almost equal increase of RTs in the second task. The PRP effect has been explained in terms of a central response-selection bottleneck in cognitive processing (Pashler, 1994). Within the bottleneck model, task processing is conceived of as a series of distinct stages, such as perceptual processing, response selection, and response execution. Empirical evidence from numerous PRP studies involving the experimental manipulation of the various processing stages in both tasks suggested that primarily the response selection stage acts as a central bottleneck. More specifically, according to such an account response selection must be devoted to only one response at a time, so that processing of the second task is suspended until response selection in the first task has been finished (Pashler, 1994). This serial central processing account thus serves as a straightforward explanation of the PRP effect. The PRP effect occurs even when sensory and
Page 1: Crossmodal Action 1 Crossmodal Acti
Page 5 and 6: Crossmodal Action 5 resource limita
Page 7 and 8: Crossmodal Action 7 incompatibility
Page 9 and 10: Crossmodal Action 9 Twenty-four stu
Page 11 and 12: Crossmodal Action 11 manual blocks,
Page 13 and 14: Crossmodal Action 13 no significant
Page 15 and 16: Crossmodal Action 15 specific compa
Page 17 and 18: Crossmodal Action 17 Alternatively,
Page 19 and 20: Crossmodal Action 19 mechanism in w
Page 21 and 22: Crossmodal Action 21 sum, the manip
Page 23 and 24: Crossmodal Action 23 Herman, L. M.,
Page 25 and 26: Crossmodal Action 25 Ruthruff, E.,
Page 27 and 28: Crossmodal Action 27 Authors’ Not
Page 29 and 30: Crossmodal Action 29 Figure 1 a) b)
Page 31: Figure 3 Crossmodal Action 31

Crossmodal Action 1 Crossmodal Action Selection - RWTH Aachen ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?