On the importance of Task 1 and error performance measures ...

Accordingly, the literature on PRP/central bottleneck theory typically introduces and entails no effect of SOA on Task 1 performance (Figure 1A; ... DownloadArticle DownloadPDF ReadCube EPUB XML(NLM) totalviews ViewArticleImpact SHAREON Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion ConflictofInterestStatement Acknowledgment Footnotes References Appendix Exportcitation EndNote ReferenceManager SimpleTEXTfile BibTex Peoplealsolookedat MINIREVIEWarticle Front.Psychol.,07April2015Sec.Cognition https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00403 OntheimportanceofTask1anderrorperformancemeasuresinPRPdual-taskstudies TiloStrobach1,2*,AnjaSchütz1andTorstenSchubert1 1DepartmentofPsychology,HumboldtUniversityBerlin,Berlin,Germany 2DepartmentofPsychology,MedicalSchoolHamburg,Hamburg,Germany Thepsychologicalrefractoryperiod(PRP)paradigmisadominantresearchtoolintheliteratureondual-taskperformance.Inthisparadigmafirstandsecondcomponenttask(i.e.,Task1andTask2)arepresentedwithvariablestimulusonsetasynchronies(SOAs)andprioritytoperformTask1.Themainindicatorofdual-taskimpairmentinPRPsituationsisanincreasingTask2-RTwithdecreasingSOAs.Thisimpairmentistypicallyexplainedwithsometaskcomponentsbeingprocessedstrictlysequentiallyinthecontextoftheprominentcentralbottlenecktheory.ThisassumptioncouldimplicitlysuggestthatprocessesofTask1areunaffectedbyTask2andbottleneckprocessing,i.e.,decreasingSOAsdonotincreasereactiontimes(RTs)anderrorratesofthefirsttask.TheaimofthepresentreviewistoassesswhetherPRPdual-taskstudiesincludedbothRTanderrordatapresentationsandstatisticalanalysesandwhetherstudiesincludingbothdatatypes(i.e.,RTsanderrorrates)showdataconsistentwiththisassumption(i.e.,decreasingSOAsandunaffectedRTsand/orerrorratesinTask1).Thisreviewdemonstratesthat,incontrasttoRTpresentationsandanalyses,errordataisunderrepresentedinasubstantialnumberofstudies.Furthermore,asubstantialnumberofstudieswithRTanderrordatashowedastatisticallysignificantimpairmentofTask1performancewithdecreasingSOA.Thus,thesestudiesproduceddatathatisnotprimarilyconsistentwiththestrongassumptionthatprocessesofTask1areunaffectedbyTask2andbottleneckprocessinginthecontextofPRPdual-tasksituations;thiscallsforamorecarefulreportandanalysisofTask1performanceinPRPstudiesandforamorecarefulconsiderationoftheoriesproposingadditionstothebottleneckassumption,whicharesufficientlygeneraltoexplainTask1andTask2effects. Introduction Whenpeopleexecutetwosimultaneousorsystematicallydelayeddistincttasksunderdual-taskconditions,performanceinthesetasksisoftenimpaired(e.g.,Kahneman,1973;Wickens,1980;Pashler,2000,andmanymore).Inthecontextofwell-controllablebehavioraldual-tasksituations,theseimpairmentsaredemonstratedbyanincreaseinreactiontimes(RTs)and/orerrorratesunderdual-taskincontrasttosingle-taskconditions(theisolatedtaskexecution),referredtoas“dual-taskcosts.” Oneofthemostprominentdual-tasksituationsisofthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod(PRP)type(Telford,1931;Vince,1949;Welford,1952;Pashler,1984,1994;PashlerandJohnston,1989,1998;OsmanandMoore,1993;Schubert,1999;Schubertetal.,2008).Inthisdual-tasksituation,twocomponenttasksarepresentedinclosesuccessionwithvarioustimeintervalsbetweentheonsetsofafirstandsecondtaskstimulus(i.e.,variablestimulusonsetasynchronies,SOAs)andparticipantsaregivenfixed-priorityinstructionsontheexecutionofthefirsttask(Task1).AsillustratedinFigure1A,theperformanceofthesecondtask(Task2)typicallydecreases(e.g.,RTsincrease)withdecreasingSOAandincreasingtaskoverlap.Thisperformancedecreaseindicatesdual-taskcostsinthecontextofPRPdualtasks(i.e.,thePRPeffect). FIGURE1 Figure1.IllustrationofperformancepatternsinthecontextofdualtasksofthePsychologicalRefractoryPeriodtype(note,thatanincreaseattheyaxisrepresentsperformanceimpairmentandanincreaseatthexaxisrepresentsanincreaseinstimulusonsetasynchrony,SOA).Panel(A):Task1andTask2performanceaccordingtothecentralbottleneckmodel.Panel(B):Task1andTask2performanceaccordingtolessstrictsequentialinterpretationsofbottleneckmodelsandimpairedperformancewithdecreasingSOAinbothtasks. ToexplainthePRPeffect,theprominentcentralbottlenecktheorysuggeststhatthementaloperationassociatedwiththeselectionofwhichresponsetoexecutecanneverbemadefortwotaskssimultaneously.Instead,thismodelassumesthatresponseselectionrequiresasinglemechanismtobededicatedtoitforsomeperiodoftime.Thus,thereisastrictsequentialresponseselectionintwotasksofadual-tasksituationduetoastructuralandunavoidableprocessingbottleneck.Inthisstrictinterpretationofthecentralbottleneckmodel,thesequentialprocessingatthecentralbottleneckleadstoprocessingimpairments(i.e.,processingdelaysorerrors)inthesecondcomponenttasksofaPRPsituation.ThisprocessingimpairmentincreaseswithdecreasingSOA(Pashler,1994),leadingtothePRPeffectinTask2. Accordingly,theliteratureonPRP/centralbottlenecktheorytypicallyintroducesandentailsnoeffectofSOAonTask1performance(Figure1A;e.g.,Pashler,1984,1994;Allenetal.,1998;RuthruffandPashler,2001;Kundeetal.,2007,andmanymore).Thislackingeffectisaconsequenceoftheassumptionofastrictsequentialprocessingofresponseselections,i.e.,(1)anengagementofacentralprocessingmechanismof100and0%toTask1andTask2,respectively,before(2)anengagementofthismechanismof0and100%toTask1andTask2,respectively.Task1andTask2performanceanalysesshouldthusbetreatedinthecontextofPRPsituationsandthecentralbottlenecktheoryinordertotesttheseassumptions.Furthermore,theseanalysesshouldfocusonallavailabledatatypes.Inthecontextofmostbehavioralexperiments,theseanalysescombineanalysesonRTsaswellaserrorratedata.1 Thedual-taskliterature,however,seemstotreat(1)Task1performanceand(2)errorrateswithlessemphasisandcaution.Oneofthefewexamplesthatsystematicallyrelatesdual-taskperformanceinformoferrorratestoRTsoccursinaseriesofstudiescombiningideomotorcompatibilitytasks(i.e.,componenttasksinwhichstimulusinformationsharesresponseinformation;e.g.,ifanauditorystimulusis“A”or“B,”say“A”and“B,”respectively)inPRPsituations(Lienetal.,2002;Greenwald,2003).Dual-taskperformanceshowedaneffectofSOAonerrorratesregardlessofthetypeofinstruction(Shinetal.,2007).TheseratesincreasedfromlongtoshortSOAsunderconditionsofaspeed-instruction(i.e.,“Performasfastaspossible”)aswellasunderaspeed-and-accuracyinstruction(i.e.,“Performasfastandasaccuratelyaspossible”)inbothTask1andTask2.Theauthorsinterpretedthesefindings(incombinationwithRTdata)asevidenceforbottleneckprocessingwhencombiningideomotorcompatibletasks.Alongsidethisexample,thereareonlyveryfewapproachesinPRPliteratureandliteraturewithstrictinterpretationsofthecentralbottlenecktheorythatsystematicallyapplyandinterpreterrordatawithafocusonTask1performanceformodelingdual-taskprocessing.Thisissurprisingconsideringthatalternativetheoreticalapproacheswithinthecontextofthecentralbottlenecktheory(seeDiscussion)andoutsidethiscontext(e.g.,resourcetheories,Kantowitz,1978;LoganandGordon,2001;NavonandMiller,2002;Wickens,2002;TombuandJolicœur,2003)particularlyprovidesystematicinterpretationsofTask1’serrorratesaswellasRTs.TheconsiderationofTask1’sdataisessentialtoproduceacomprehensivepictureofdual-taskprocessinginthecontextofthesetheories. AsaconsequenceoftheimpressionoftreatingTask1performancewithlessemphasisandcaution,theaimofthepresentstudyistosystematicallyreviewPRPliteraturewithafocuson(1)thereportpolicyofTask1performancedataaswellas(2)theactualperformanceinthistask.ThefirstaimgenerallyspecifiesthepolicytoreporterrordatacomparedtoRTdataofTask1.Importantly,wespecifythispolicywithafocusonpresentingRTanderrordata(e.g.,informoffiguresand/ortables),aswellasreportingstatisticsonbothperformancemeasures(e.g.,informofanalysisofvariance).WhilethecentralbottlenecktheorymakesexplicitassumptionsonRTs,errorratesareoftenunderrepresentedinthecontextofthistheory.Therefore,wespeculatethat,duetothisunderrepresentation,thenumberofPRPstudiesincludingreportederrordata(i.e.,informofdatapresentationsandstatisticalanalyses)islowerthanthenumberincludingRTdata(despiteageneralrequestofnoselectivedatareportinempiricalstudies,Bootetal.,2011). WereviewwhetherTask1performanceisindependentofSOAusingtheperspectiveofthesecondaim:thatis,RTsanderrorratesareconstantacrossSOAs.Ontheotherhand,thefollowingdatapatternsinTask1arenotconceivableinthecontextofthistheory:(1)RTsareconstantanderrorratesincreasewithdecreasingSOA,(2)errorratesareconstantandRTsincreasewithdecreasingSOA,(3)errorratesandRTsincreasewithdecreasingSOA(Figure1B).Theselatterdatapatternsareconsistentwiththeassumptionthatbottleneckprocessingispotentiallylesssequentialthantheorizedinastrictinterpretationofthecentralbottlenecktheory,buttheycallforadditionstothisassumption(asindicatedintheDiscussion). WeaimtoinvestigatetheproportionofPRPstudiesthatareconsistentwithoneofthesedatapatternsinthepresentreview.Indetail,weanalyzedthenumberofPRPexperimentsshowingastatisticallysignificantmaineffectofSOA(typicallyinANOVAs)onTask1’sRTsand/orerrorrates,incombinationwithdatapatternsdemonstratingimpairedperformancewithdecreasingSOA(i.e.,increasedRTsand/orerrorrateswithshorterSOA).2PRPdual-tasksituationsarerigoroustestsofthesepatternsinTask1,sinceparticipantsareexplicitlyinstructedtoprioritizethistask.ThispriorityonTask1shouldmakethistasklessvulnerableforperformancemodulationsduetothetiming(i.e.,SOA)ofthefollowingTask2andshouldreducethelikelihoodofimpairedTask1performancewithdecreasingSOAs.NotethatweexclusivelyreviewSOAmaineffectsonRTsand/orerrorratesbecausewefocusonrobusteffects.ThisfocusonrobusteffectsparallelstherobustemergenceofPRPeffectsinTask2andtheircleardemonstrationviaSOAmaineffects.Furthermore,ourfocusonSOAmaineffectsallowsustocombineanalysesacrossdifferentstudiesinwhichSOAmodulationisoftencombinedwithoneorasetofalternativefactors(e.g.,modulationsofstimuluscharacteristics,stimulus-responserelations,etc.).Generally,thistypeofreviewshouldhelpadvancethedual-taskliteraturebyspecifyingthedual-taskprocessingarchitectureofPRPdualtasks.Furthermore,thisreviewinvestigatesthebenefitsofusingerrorratesand/orTask1performanceasadatasourcetoimproveourinsightintodual-taskprocessinganditstheory. Methods WesearchedpapersviatheabstractingandindexingdatabasePsycINFOdevotedtopeer-reviewedliteratureinthebehavioralsciencesandmentalhealthonMay17th2013.Thesearchtermwas“PRP.”Thissearchresultedinatotalnumberof291entriesfromwhichweexcludedreviews,clinicalpapers,dissertationabstracts,bookchapters,modelingstudies,andnon-Englishentries.Thisexclusionprocedureleftaselectionof133studies.Intotal,thesestudiescomprised306experiments. Results IntheResultssection,wefirstfocusontheamountofpaperspresentingTask1’sRTdatavs.errorratesinformoffiguresand/ortables.Secondly,wereporttheamountofstudiesthatperforminference-statisticalanalyses(e.g.,analysisofvariance)onRTsand/orerrorratesofthistask.Thirdly,wereviewPRPstudieswithaparticularfocusontheimpactofdecreasingSOAondecreasingperformance(i.e.,increasingRTsanderrorrates)inTask1. Thenumberandpercentofexperiments(outofthetotalof306experimentsof133studies)presentingRTorerrordatainformof(1)figures,(2)tables,(3)figuresandtables,aswellas(4)figuresand/ortablesforTask1,ispresentedinTable1.ApartfromwhatPRPstudiesincludeandispresentedinthistable,thereversedperspectiveonthistableisremarkable:181(59.2%)ofallexperiments[and97(45.3%)ofallexperimentswithpresentationofTask1RTdata]presentednoerrordata.Incontrast,only92(30.1%)ofallexperiments[and8(6.4%)ofallexperimentswithpresentationoferrordata]presentednoRTdata.Thus,thisreviewdemonstratestheunderrepresentationoferrordatapresentationincontrasttopresentingRTsofTask1inPRPdual-taskstudies. TABLE1 Table1.NumberandpercentofexperimentspresentingRTsanderrorratesinfigures,tables,figuresandtables,aswellasfiguresortables. Thenumberandpercentofexperiments(outofatotalof306experimentsof133studies)withstatisticalanalysesofRTorerrordataispresentedinTable2.Fromourperspective,themostcrucialfactofthistableisthatonly48.7%oftheexperimentsprovidedstatisticalanalysesoftheirRTsanderrorrates.Ontheotherside,thistableshowsthatthereisnocompletepresentationofstatisticalanalysesfor51.3%oftheexperiments.Thus,thisreviewdemonstratesthatmanyPRPdual-taskstudiesallownoconclusiveconclusionsaboutTask1performanceandnotestoftheimplicitassumptionthatthistask’sperformanceisindependentofSOA. TABLE2 Table2.Numberandpercentofexperiments(totalnumberexperimentsis306)withstatisticalanalysesof(1)RTs,(2)errordata,(3)RTsanderrordata,aswellas(4)RTsand/orerrordatainTask1. Whilefocusingonthethirdissue,weexclusivelyanalyzedtheselectionofstudies(combining149experiments,seeAppendix)thatprovidedstatisticalanalysesoftheirTask1’sRTsanderrorrates(Table3).ThisfocusshowsthataremarkablenumberofPRPdual-taskstudiesproduceddatathatarenotconsistentwiththeassumptionofastrictsequentialbottleneckprocessingbutcallsforadditionstothisbottleneckassumption(Figure1B):Task1performancewasnotindependentofSOAinmostofthesestudiesandshowedimpairedperformancewithdecreasingSOA(67.1%). TABLE3 Table3.Numberandpercentofexperiments(totalnumberexperimentsis149)withstatisticalanalysesofRTsanderrordata(seeTable2)aswellasaneffectofSOAonTask1performance(i.e.,decreasingSOAandincreasingRTs/errorrates). Discussion Ourreviewdemonstratesthatalotofstudiesdonotpresentalldatathatisrequiredtoanalyzeandmodeldual-taskprocessinginthecontextofthecentralbottlenecktheoryinthecaseofPRPdual-taskexperiments.First,whileareasonableamountofstudiespresentedRTdataofbothcomponenttasks(69.3%),thisamountisdrasticallyreducedforerrordata:only40.8%ofthePRPstudiespresentedthisdatatypeintablesand/orfigures.ThisratherlowamountofstudiesincludingerrordatapresentationsdemonstratesthatthereisnoobtainableconclusiveinterpretationofPRPdual-taskperformanceinmanystudies.Thus,thesestudiesdonotallowtocompletelymodeldual-taskprocessinginthecontextofthecentralbottlenecktheory.Furthermore,wefoundaratherlownumberofstudiesthatanalyzedthisdatastatisticallyandallowedconclusiveconclusionsaboutinthiscontext.Atthispoint,itishoweverfairtoadmitthatnotallstudiesthatwereidentifiedbasedonourliteraturesearchon“PRP”pursuedoninvestigatingthecentralbottlenecktheory;thePRPparadigmcanbeusedmanifold(e.g.,tosimplyinducecapacityconstraintstoTask2processing).Insuchcases,reports,analyses,andinterpretationsshouldmainlyfocusonrelevantaspects(e.g.,primarilydataofTask2). IfweincludedstudieswithstatisticalreportsonerrordataandRTs,asubstantialnumberofexperimentsdemonstratedthat,withdecreasingSOA,thereareincreasesoferrorrates,increasesofRTs,orbothinTask1.Infact,67.1%oftheincludedexperimentsdemonstratedoneofthesepatterns.Weassumethatthisnumbercouldbeevenhigherbecause(1)experimentswithSOAnulleffectsinTask1maymerelylackstatisticalpowertoreachthesignificancethresholdofaSOAmaineffectand/or(2)studieswithnoimpairedperformancewithdecreasingSOAalsoincludestudiesshowinganoppositepattern:performanceimpairmentswithincreasingSOA(seetextFootnote2).Thispatternmay,however,demonstratetheimpactofaresponsegroupingstrategy(e.g.,Borger,1963;Schubert,1996;MillerandUlrich,2008).ThisstrategymaymaskadatapatternofanimpairedperformancewithdecreasingSOAandthusmayobscurethenumberofstudiesincludingthispattern.Moreover,forreasonsofcomparability,weexclusivelyfocusedonSOAmaineffectsandneglectedcombinationsoftheseeffectswithalternativeexperimentalfactors(i.e.,interactions).TheextensionofthefocustointeractionscouldpotentiallyincreasethenumberofexperimentswithperformanceimpairmentsofTask1withdecreasingSOA(particularlywhentheSOAmaineffectisnon-significant). Nevertheless,thereareanumberoftheoriesthatexplicitlyconsiderdual-taskcostsinTask1(inthePRPcontext:performanceimpairmentsatshortincontrasttolongSOAs).First,capacity-sharingtheoriesassumethattworesponseselectionscanbeprocessedinparallel,butthatsharingthesamelimitedresource(s)causesdual-taskcosts(e.g.,HermanandKantowitz,1970;KantowitzandKnight,1974,1976;Kantowitz,1978;Wickens,2002;TombuandJolicœur,2003),becausetherearefewerresourcesforeachindividualtaskandperformanceisthusimpaired.Participantsstrategicallyprioritizedonetaskoveranotherfollowinginstructionsand/orchangesintherelationshipofdifficultybetweenthecombinedtasks,whichisconsistentwiththisperspective(e.g.,NormanandBobrow,1975;NavonandGopher,1979;Gopheretal.,1982).Recentrepresentativesofcapacity-sharingtheories(e.g.,LoganandGordon,2001;NavonandMiller,2002;TombuandJolicœur,2003)assumethatsequentialprocessing,asanticipatedinthecentralbottlenecktheory,maybeastrategicproductofflexibleschedulingoflimitedresources.Forexample,participantsmaynothavefollowedtheinstructionofPRPdualtasksstrictlyschedulingengagement100%toTask1and0%toTask2adequately.Task1effectscanalsobeexplainedbytheassumptionofastrategictaskschedulingwithaflexiblebottlenecklocalizationduringthetaskprocessingandresourcesharingatthelevelofexecutivecontrolprocesses(MeyerandKieras,1997). Second,dual-taskcostsinTask1werealsoexplainedintermsofbetween-taskcrosstalk(e.g.,Hommel,1998;LoganandSchulkind,2000;LoganandGordon,2001;LienandProctor,2002;NavonandMiller,2002;Schubertetal.,2008).Forinstance,performancedecreaseswhentwotasksrequirethesimultaneousexecutionofincompatible(e.g.,leftvs.right)incontrasttocompatible(e.g.,leftvs.left)spatialresponses.Thiscrosstalkassumptionisgenerallyconsistentwiththeassumptionofcapacity-sharingtheories,sincebothenableinformationtransferbetweencomponenttasksunderdual-taskconditions.Thus,ifsomeofthestudiesdemonstratingTask1performanceimpairmentwithdecreasingSOAshowedthisimpairmentbecauseofcrosstalk,thisfindingisconsistentwithsharingcommonresourcesbetweentasks.Thedifferencebetweencrosstalkapproachesandcapacity-sharingtheoriesishoweverthattheformerdependonwhatcontentofinformationisprocessedwhiledual-taskcostsdependonwhatsortofoperationistobecarriedoutisinterpretedinthelattercapacity-sharingcontext.Interestingly,theapproachesofHommel(1998),LienandProctor(2002),aswellasSchubertetal.(2008)proposeadistinctionofdifferentsub-processesoftheresponseselectionmechanisms(e.g.,responseactivationandinitiation),whichtodifferentdegreesaresubjectedtocross-taskandtosequentialprocessingbetweentasks.ThisallowsexplainingarangeofthereportedTask1effects,withelaboratedbottleneckmodels. Third,theprocessingbottleneck(informofasharedcapacitylimitationorastructuralbottleneckasinthecentralbottlenecktheory)requiresthecoordinationoftwotaskprocessingstreams.Forinstance,thesetaskcoordinationprocessesarerelatedtotheefficientpreparationofTask1information(deJong,1995),schedulingofresponseselections,aswellasswitchesbetweenthem(Umiltàetal.,1992;Schubert,1996,2008;Lienetal.,2003;BandandvanNes,2006;SigmanandDehaene,2006;Szameitatetal.,2006;Liepeltetal.,2011;Strobachetal.,2012b,2014).Weassumethatthelattersetofmechanisms(i.e.,taskcoordinationprocesses)particularlyaffectsTask1processingunderconditionsofuncertaintyoftaskorderprocessing(e.g.,ArnellandDuncan,2002,Experiment1;deJong,1995;TombuandJolicœur,2002;LuriaandMeiran,2003,2005,2006;SigmanandDehaene,2006;Schubert,2008;LeonhardandUlrich,2011;Strobachetal.,2012a;Töllneretal.,2012)becausethedecisionontheorderofbottleneckaccessistypicallylocatedbeforebottleneckprocessinginTask1(Umiltàetal.,1992;Schubert,1996;Hendrichetal.,2012).Thenumberofstudieswithtaskorderuncertaintyis,however,ratherlowincomparisontotheentiresetofanalyzedPRPstudiesandthusshouldnotobscureourgeneralconclusion:asubstantialnumberofexperimentsinthecontextofPRPdual-taskexperimentsdemonstratedecreasingTask1performancewithdecreasingSOA,whichisnotconsistentwiththeassumptionthatprocessesofTask1areunaffectedofTask2andbottleneckprocessinginthecontextofPRPdual-tasksituations.Actually,thiscallsforamorecarefulconsiderationoftheoriesproposingadditionstothebottleneckassumption,whicharesufficientlygeneraltoexplainTask1andTask2effects. ConflictofInterestStatement Theauthorsdeclarethattheresearchwasconductedintheabsenceofanycommercialorfinancialrelationshipsthatcouldbeconstruedasapotentialconflictofinterest. Acknowledgment WethankAntoniaPapadakisforproofreadingthetext. Footnotes ^Here,erroneousdual-taskperformanceisdefinedasgivinganincorrectresponseoromittingaresponseinaparticularcomponenttaskandwithseparateerrorrateanalysesonTask1andTask2.Thisperspectivedoesnotconsiderstudiesinwhichanyerrorthatoccurredduringdual-taskperformance(irrespectiveofthecomponenttask)meantthatthedualtaskasawholewasnotperformedcorrectlyandthuserroranalysiswasconductedforbothtasksincombination(e.g.,LoganandSchulkind,2000;Strobachetal.,2013;Zwostaetal.,2013).Wetakethisperspective,becausethecombinederroranalysisdoesnotallowelaboratedandindependentconclusionsforTask1andTask2performance. ^WewerenotinterestedinthereversephenomenonofimpairedperformancewithincreasingSOA(i.e.,decreasedRTs/errorratesatshortincontrasttolongSOAs)whichistypicallydiscussedinthecontextofgroupingoftworesponses/atendencytowithholdtheexecutionofafirstresponseuntiltheexecutionofasecondresponse(Borger,1963;MillerandUlrich,2008). References Allen,P.A.,Smith,A.F.,Vires-Collins,H.,andSperry,S.(1998).Thepsychologicalrefractoryperiod:evidenceforagedifferencesinattentionaltime-sharing.Psychol.Aging13,218–229. PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|GoogleScholar Arnell,K.M.,andDuncan,J.(2002).Separateandsharedsourcesofdual-taskcostinstimulusidentificationandresponseselection.Cogn.Psychol.44,105–147.doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0762 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Band,G.P.H.,andvanNes,F.T.(2006).Reconfigurationandthebottleneck:doestaskswitchingaffecttherefractory-periodeffect?Eur.J.Cogn.Psychol.18,593–623.doi:10.1080/09541440500423244 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Boot,W.R.,Blakely,D.P.,andSimons,D.J.(2011).Doactionvideogamesimproveperceptionandcognition?Front.Psychol.2:266.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00226 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Borger,R.(1963).Therefractoryperiodandserialchoice-reactions.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.15,1–12.doi:10.1080/17470216308416546 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar deJong,R.(1995).Strategicaldeterminantsofcompatibilityeffectswithtaskuncertainty.ActaPsychol.88,187–207.doi:10.1016/0001-6918(94)E0067-P CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Gopher,D.,Brickner,M.,andNavon,D.(1982).Differentdifficultymanipulationsinteractdifferentlywithtaskemphasis:evidenceformultipleresources.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.8,146–157.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.8.1.146 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Greenwald,A.G.(2003).Ondoingtwothingsatonce:III.Confirmationofperfecttimesharingwhensimultaneoustasksareideomotorcompatible.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,859–868.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.5.859 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hendrich,E.,Strobach,T.,Buss,M.,Müller,H.,andSchubert,T.(2012).Temporal-orderjudgmentofvisualandauditorystimuli:modulationsinsituationswithandwithoutstimulusdiscrimination.Front.Integr.Neurosci.6:63.doi:10.3389/fnint.2012.00063 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Herman,L.M.,andKantowitz,B.H.(1970).Thepsychologicalrefractoryperiodeffect:onlyhalfthedouble-stimulationstory?Psychol.Bull.73,74–88.doi:10.1037/h0028357 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hommel,B.(1998).Automaticstimulus–responsetranslationindual-taskperformance.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.24,1368–1384.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.24.5.1368 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kahneman,D.(1973).AttentionandEffort.EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHall. GoogleScholar Kantowitz,B.H.(1978).Responseconflicttheory,errorratesandhybridprocessing:areplytoMcLeod.ActaPsychol.42,397–403.doi:10.1016/0001-6918(78)90021-5 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kantowitz,B.H.,andKnight,J.L.(1974).Testingtappingtime-sharing.J.Exp.Psychol.103,331–336.doi:10.1037/h0036808 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kantowitz,B.H.,andKnight,J.L.Jr.(1976).Testingtappingtimesharing,II:auditorysecondarytask.ActaPsychol.40,343–362.doi:10.1016/0001-6918(76)90016-0 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kunde,W.,Landgraf,F.,Paelecke,M.,andKiesel,A.(2007).Dorsalandventralprocessingunderdual-taskconditions.Psychol.Sci.18,100–104. PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|GoogleScholar Leonhard,T.,andUlrich,R.(2011).Determinantsofcentralprocessingorderinpsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigms:centralarrivaltimes,detectiontimes,orpreparation?Q.J.Exp.Psychol.64,2012–2043.doi:10.1080/17470218.2011.573567 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.-C.,andProctor,R.W.(2002).Stimulus-responsecompatibilityandpsychologicalrefractoryperiodeffects:implicationsforresponseselection.Psychon.Bull.Rev.9,212–238.doi:10.3758/BF03196277 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.-C.,Proctor,R.W.,andAllen,P.A.(2002).Ideomotorcompatibilityinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodeffect:29yearsofoversimplification.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.28,396–409.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.28.2.396 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.-C.,Schweickert,R.,andProctor,R.W.(2003).Taskswitchingandresponsecorrespondenceinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,692–712.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.692 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Liepelt,R.,Strobach,T.,Frensch,P.,andSchubert,T.(2011).Improvedintertaskcoordinationafterextensivedual-taskpractice.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.64,1251–1272.doi:10.1080/17470218.2010.543284 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Logan,G.D.,andGordon,R.D.(2001).Executivecontrolofvisualattentionindual-tasksituations.Psychol.Rev.108,393–434.doi:10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.393 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Logan,G.D.,andSchulkind,M.D.(2000).Parallelmemoryretrievalindual-tasksituations:I.Semanticmemory.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.26,1072–1090.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.26.3.1072 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Luria,R.,andMeiran,N.(2003).Onlineordercontrolinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,556.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.556 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Luria,R.,andMeiran,N.(2005).Increasedcontroldemandresultsinserialprocessingevidencefromdual-taskperformance.Psychol.Sci.16,833–840.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01622.x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Luria,R.,andMeiran,N.(2006).Dualrouteforsubtaskordercontrol:evidencefromthepsychologicalrefractoryparadigm.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.59,720–744.doi:10.1080/02724980543000060 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Meyer,D.E.,andKieras,D.E.(1997).Acomputationaltheoryofexecutivecognitiveprocessesandmultiple-taskperformance:Part2.Accountsofpsychologicalrefractory-periodphenomena.Psychol.Rev.104,749–791.doi:10.1037/0033-295X.104.4.749 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Miller,J.,andUlrich,R.(2008).Bimanualresponsegroupingindual-taskparadigms.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.61,999–1019.doi:10.1080/17470210701434540 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Navon,D.,andGopher,D.(1979).Ontheeconomyofthehuman-processingsystem.Psychol.Rev.86,214–255.doi:10.1037/0033-295X.86.3.214 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Navon,D.,andMiller,J.(2002).Queuingorsharing?Acriticalevaluationofthesingle-bottlenecknotion.Cogn.Psychol.44,193–251.doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0767 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Norman,D.A.,andBobrow,D.G.(1975).Ondata-limitedandresource-limitedprocesses.Cogn.Psychol.7,44–64.doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-3 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Osman,A.,andMoore,C.M.(1993).Thelocusofdual-taskinterference:psychologicalrefractoryeffectsonmovement-relatedbrainpotentials.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percep.Perform.19,1292–1312. GoogleScholar Pashler,H.(1984).Processingstagesinoverlappingtasks:evidenceforacentralbottleneck.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.10,358–377.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.10.3.358 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Pashler,H.(1994).Dual-taskinterferenceinsimpletasks:dataandtheory.Psychol.Bull.116,220–244.doi:10.1037/0033-2909.116.2.220 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Pashler,H.(2000).“Taskswitchingandmultitaskperformance,”inAttentionandPerformance,XVIII:ControlofMentalProcesses,edsS.Monsell,andJ.Driver(Cambridge,MA:MITPress). GoogleScholar Pashler,H.andJohnston,J.(1989).Chronometricevidenceforcentralpostponementintemporallyoverlappingtasks.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.41A,19–45. GoogleScholar Pashler,H.,andJohnston,J.C.(1998).“Attentionallimitationsindual-taskperformance,”inAttention,ed.H.Pashler(PsychologyPress/Erlbaum(Uk)Taylor&Francis:Hove),155–189. GoogleScholar Ruthruff,E.andPashler,H.E.(2001).“Perceptualandcentralinterferenceindual-taskperformance,”inTemporalConstraintsonHumanInformationProcessing,ed.K.Shapiro(NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress),100–123. GoogleScholar Schubert,T.(1996).Interferenceduringthesimultaneousperformanceoftwotasks.Z.Exp.Psychol.4,625–656. GoogleScholar Schubert,T.(1999).Processingdifferencesbetweensimpleandchoicereactionaffectbottlenecklocalizationinoverlappingtasks.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.25,408–425.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.25.2.408 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schubert,T.(2008).Thecentralattentionallimitationandexecutivecontrol.Front.Biosci.13,3569–3580.doi:10.2741/2950 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schubert,T.,Fischer,R.,andStelzel,C.(2008).Responseactivationinoverlappingtasksandtheresponseselectionbottleneck.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.34,376–397.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.376 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Shin,Y.-K.,Cho,Y.-S.,Lien,M.-C.,andProctor,R.W.(2007).Isthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodeffectforideomotorcompatibletaskseliminatedbyspeed-emphasisinstructions?Psychol.Res.71,553–567.doi:10.1007/s00426-006-0066-2 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Sigman,M.,andDehaene,S.(2006).Dynamicsofthecentralbottleneck:dual-taskandtaskuncertainty.PLoSBiol.4:e220.doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040220 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Strobach,T.,Frensch,P.A.,andSchubert,T.(2012a).Videogamepracticeoptimizesexecutivecontrolskillsindual-taskandtaskswitchingsituations.ActaPsychol.140,13–24.doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.02.001 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Strobach,T.,Frensch,P.A.,Soutschek,A.,andSchubert,T.(2012b).Investigationontheimprovementandtransferofdual-taskcoordinationskills.Psychol.Res.76,794–811.doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0381-0 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Strobach,T.,Liepelt,R.,Pashler,H.,Frensch,P.A.,andSchubert,T.(2013).Effectsofextensivedual-taskpracticeonprocessingstagesinsimultaneouschoicetasks.Atten.Percept.Psychophys.75,900–920.doi:10.3758/s13414-013-0451-z PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Strobach,T.,Salminen,T.,Karbach,J.,andSchubert,T.(2014).Practice-relatedoptimizationandtransferofexecutivefunctions:ageneralreviewandaspecificrealizationoftheirmechanismsindualtasks.Psychol.Res.78,836–851.doi:10.1007/s00426-014-0563-7 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Szameitat,A.J.,Lepsien,J.,VonCramon,D.Y.,Sterr,A.,andSchubert,T.(2006).Task-ordercoordinationindual-taskperformanceandthelateralprefrontalcortex:anevent-relatedfMRIstudy.Psychol.Res.70,541–552.doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0015-5 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Telford,C.W.(1931).Therefractoryphaseofvoluntaryandassociativeresponses.J.Exp.Psychol.14,1–36. GoogleScholar Töllner,T.,Strobach,T.,Schubert,T.,andMüller,H.J.(2012).Theeffectoftaskorderpredictabilityinaudio-visualdualtaskperformance:justacentralcapacitylimitation?Front.Integr.Neurosci.6:75.doi:10.3389/fnint.2012.00075 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tombu,M.,andJolicœur,P.(2002).All-or-nonebottleneckversuscapacitysharingaccountsofthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodphenomenon.Psychol.Res.66,274–286.doi:10.1007/s00426-002-0101-x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tombu,M.,andJolicœur,P.(2003).Acentralcapacitysharingmodelofdual-taskperformance.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,3–18.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.1.3 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Umiltà,C.,Nicoletti,R.,Simion,F.,Tagliabue,M.E.,andBagnara,S.(1992).Thecostofastrategy.Eur.J.Cogn.Psychol.4,21–40.doi:10.1080/09541449208406241 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Vince,M.(1949).Rapidresponsesequencesandthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod.Br.J.ofPsychol.40,23–40. PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|GoogleScholar Welford,A.T.(1952).Thepsychologicalrefractoryperiodandthetimingofhighspeedperformance—areviewandatheory.Br.J.Psychol.43,2–19.doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1952.tb00322.x CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Wickens,C.D.(1980).“Thestructureofattentionalresources,”inAttentionandPerformanceVIII,ed.R.Nickerson(HillsdaleNJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates). GoogleScholar Wickens,C.D.(2002).Multipleresourcesandperformanceprediction.Theor.IssuesErgon.Sci.3,159–177.doi:10.1080/14639220210123806 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Zwosta,K.,Hommel,B.,Goschke,T.,andFischer,R.(2013).Moodstatesdeterminethedegreeoftaskshieldingindual-taskperformance.Cogn.Emot.27,1142–1152.doi:10.1080/02699931.2013.772047 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Appendix Allen,P.A.,Lien,M.,Murphy,M.D.,Sanders,R.E.,Judge,K.S.,andMcCann,R.S.(2002).Agedifferencesinoverlapping-taskperformance:evidenceforefficientparallelprocessinginolderadults.Psychol.Aging17,505–519.doi:10.1037/0882-7974.17.3.505 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Allen,P.A.,Ruthruff,E.,Elicker,J.D.,andLien,M.(2009).Multisession,dual-taskpsychologicalrefractoryperiodpracticebenefitsolderandyoungeradultsequally.Exp.AgingRes.35,369–399.doi:10.1080/03610730903175766 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Allen,P.A.,Smith,A.F.,Vires-Collins,H.,andSperry,S.(1998).Thepsychologicalrefractoryperiod:evidenceforagedifferencesinattentionaltime-sharing.Psychol.Aging13,218–229.doi:10.1037/0882-7974.13.2.218 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Arnell,K.M.,andDuncan,J.(2002).Separateandsharedsourcesofdual-taskcostinstimulusidentificationandresponseselection.Cogn.Psychol.44,105–147.doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0762 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Arnell,K.M.,Helion,A.M.,Hurdelbrink,J.A.,andPasieka,B.(2004).Dissociatingsourcesofdual-taskinterferenceusinghumanelectrophysiology.Psychon.Bull.Rev.11,77–83.doi:10.3758/BF03206464 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Band,G.P.H.,andvanNes,F.T.(2006).Reconfigurationandthebottleneck:doestaskswitchingaffecttherefractoryperiodeffect?Eur.J.Cogn.Psychol.18,593–623.doi:10.1080/09541440500423244 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Bausenhart,K.M.,Rolke,B.,Hackley,S.A.,andUlrich,R.(2006).Thelocusoftemporalpreparationeffects:evidencefromthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.Psychon.Bull.Rev.13,536–542.doi:10.3758/BF03193882 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Besner,D.,Mike,R.,andO’Malley,S.(2009).Whenunderadditivityoffactoreffectsinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigmimpliesabottleneck:evidencefrompsycholinguistics.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.62,2222–2234.doi:10.1080/17470210902747187 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Brisson,B.,andJolicoeur,P.(2007a).Apsychologicalrefractoryperiodinaccesstovisualshort-termmemoryandthedeploymentofvisual-spatialattention:multitaskingprocessingdeficitsrevealedbyevent-relatedpotentials.Psychophysiology44,323–333.doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00503.x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Brisson,B.,andJolicoeur,P.(2007b).Electrophysiologicalevidenceofcentralinterferenceinthecontrolofvisuospatialattention.Psychon.Bull.Rev.14,126–132.doi:10.3758/BF03194039 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Brisson,B.,Leblanc,E.,andJolicoeur,P.(2009).Contingentcaptureofvisual-spatialattentiondependsoncapacity-limitedcentralmechanisms:evidencefromhumanelectrophysiologyandthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod.Biol.Psychol.80,218–225.doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2008.10.001 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Carrier,L.M.,andPashler,H.(1995).Attentionallimitsinmemoryretrieval.J.Exp.Psychol.Learn.Mem.Cogn.21,1339–1348.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.21.5.1339 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Cleland,A.A.,Gaskell,M.G.,Quinlan,P.T.,andTamminen,J.(2006).Frequencyeffectsinspokenandvisualwordrecognition:evidencefromdual-taskmethodologies.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.32,104–119.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.104 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Corriveau,I.,Fortier-Gauthier,U.,Pomerleau,V.J.,McDonald,J.,Dell’Acqua,R.,andJolicoeur,P.(2012).Electrophysiologicalevidenceofmultitaskingimpairmentofattentionaldeploymentreflectstarget-specificprocessing,notdistractorinhibition.Int.J.Psychophysiol.86,152–159.doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2012.06.005 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Crebolder,J.M.,Jolicoeur,P.,andMcIlwaine,J.D.(2002).Lociofsignalprobabilityeffectsandoftheattentionalblinkbottleneck.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.28,695–716.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.28.3.695 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Dell’Acqua,R.,Turatto,M.,andJolicoeur,P.(2001).Cross-modalattentionaldeficitsinprocessingtactilestimulation.Percept.Psychophys.63,777–789.doi:10.3758/BF03194437 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Dent,K.,Johnston,R.A.,andHumphreys,G.W.(2008).Ageofacquisitionandwordfrequencyeffectsinpicturenaming:adual-taskinvestigation.J.Exp.Psychol.Learn.Mem.Cogn.34,282–301.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.282 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fan,Z.,Singh,K.,Muthukumaraswamy,S.,Sigman,M.,Dehaene,S.,andShapiro,K.(2012).Thecostofseriallychainingtwocognitiveoperations.Psychol.Res.76,566–578.doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0375-y PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fernández,S.R.,Leonhard,T.,Rolke,B.,andRolf,U.(2011).Processingtwotaskswithvaryingtaskorder:centralstagedurationinfluencescentralprocessingorder.ActaPsychol.137,10–17.doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.01.016 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fischer,R.,Miller,J.,andSchubert,T.(2007).Evidenceforparallelsemanticmemoryretrievalindualtasks.Mem.Cogn.35,1685–1699.doi:10.3758/BF03193502 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Fischer,R.,andSchubert,T.(2008).Valenceprocessingbypassingtheresponseselectionbottleneck?Evidencefromthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.Exp.Psychol.55,203–211.doi:10.1027/1618-3169.55.3.203 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Gaskell,M.G.,Quinlan,P.T.,Tamminen,J.,andCleland,A.A.(2008).Thenatureofphonemerepresentationinspokenwordrecognition.J.Exp.Psychol.Gen.137,282–302.doi:10.1037/0096-3445.137.2.282 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Glass,J.M.,Schumacher,E.H.,Lauber,E.J.,Zubriggen,E.L.,Gmeindl,L.,Kieras,D.E.,etal.(2000).Agingandthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod:task-coordinationstrategiesinyoungandoldadults.Psychol.Aging15,571–595.doi:10.1037/0882-7974.15.4.571 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Green,C.,Johnston,J.C.,andRuthruff,E.(2011).Attentionallimitsinmemoryretrieval—revisited.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.37,1083–1098.doi:10.1037/a0023095 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hartley,A.A.,Maquestiaux,F.,Brooks,R.D.,Festini,S.B.,andFrazier,K.(2012).Electrodermalresponsestosourcesofdual-taskinterference.Cogn.Affect.Behav.Neurosci.12,543–556.doi:10.3758/s13415-012-0094-x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hazeltine,E.,andRuthruff,E.(2006).Modalitypairingeffectsandtheresponseselectionbottleneck.Psychol.Res.70,504–513.doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0017-3 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Heil,M.,Wahl,K.,andHerbst,M.(1999).Mentalrotation,memoryscanning,andthecentralbottleneck.Psychol.Res.62,48–61.doi:10.1007/s004260050039 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hein,G.,andSchubert,T.(2004).Agingandinputprocessingindual-tasksituations.Psychol.Aging19,416–432.doi:10.1037/0882-7974.19.3.416 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hesselmann,G.,Flandin,G.,andDehaene,S.(2011).Probingthecorticalnetworkunderlyingthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod:acombinedEEG–fMRIstudy.Neuroimage56,1608–1621.doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.017 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Hibberd,D.L.,Jamson,S.,andCarsten,O.M.J.(2013).Mitigatingtheeffectsofin-vehicledistractionsthroughuseofthePsychologicalRefractoryPeriodparadigm.Accid.Anal.Prev.50,1096–1103.doi:10.1016/j.aap.2012.08.016 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Janczyk,M.,Franz,V.H.,andKunde,W.(2010).Graspingforparsimony:dosomemotoractionsescapedorsalprocessing?Neuropsychologia48,3405–3415.doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.06.034 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Janczyk,M.,andKunde,W.(2010).Doesdorsalprocessingrequirecentralcapacity?MoreevidencefromthePRPparadigm.Exp.BrainRes.203,89–100.doi:10.1007/s00221-010-2211-9 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Jentzsch,I.,Leuthold,H.,andUlrich,R.(2007).DecomposingsourcesofresponseslowinginthePRPparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.33,610–626.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.3.610 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Jiang,Y.,Saxe,R.,andKanwisher,N.(2004).Functionalmagneticresonanceimagingprovidesnewconstraintsontheoriesofthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod.Psychol.Sci.15,390–396.doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00690.x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Jolicoeur,P.,andDell’Acqua,R.(1999).Attentionalandstructuralconstraintsonvisualencoding.Psychol.Res.62,154–164.doi:10.1007/s004260050048 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Klapötke,S.,Krüger,D.,andMattler,U.(2011).APRP-studytodeterminethelocusoftargetprimingeffects.Conscious.Cogn.20,882–900.doi:10.1016/j.concog.2011.04.008 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Krüger,D.,Klapötke,S.,andMattler,U.(2011).PRP-paradigmprovidesevidenceforaperceptualoriginofthenegativecompatibilityeffect.Conscious.Cogn.20,866–881.doi:10.1016/j.concog.2010.09.014 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kunde,W.,Landgraf,F.,Paelecke,M.,andKiesel,A.(2007).Dorsalandventralprocessingunderdual-taskconditions.Psychol.Sci.18,100–104.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01855.x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Kunde,W.,Pfister,R.,andJanczyk,M.(2012).Thelocusoftool-transformationcosts.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.38,703–714.doi:10.1037/a0026315 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lawson,R.,Humphreys,G.W.,andJolicoeur,P.(2000).Thecombinedeffectsofplanedisorientationandforeshorteningonpicturenaming:onemanipulationortwo?J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.26,568–581.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.26.2.568 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Leonhard,T.,Fernández,S.R.,Ulrich,R.,andMiller,J.(2011).Dual-taskprocessingwhentask1ishardandtask2iseasy:reversedcentralprocessingorder?J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.37,115–136.doi:10.1037/a0019238 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Levy,J.,Pashler,H.,andBoer,E.(2006).Centralinterferenceindriving:isthereanystoppingthepsychologicalrefractoryperiod?Psychol.Sci.17,228–235.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01690.x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.,Croswaite,K.,andRuthruff,E.(2011).Controllingspatialattentionwithoutcentralattentionalresources:evidencefromevent-relatedpotentials.Vis.Cogn.19,37–78.doi:10.1080/13506285.2010.491643 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.,McCann,R.S.,Ruthruff,E.,andProctor,R.W.(2005).Dual-taskperformancewithideomotor-compatibletasks:isthecentralprocessingbottleneckintact,bypassed,orshiftedinlocus?J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.31,122–144.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.1.122 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.,Proctor,R.W.,andAllen,P.A.(2002).Ideomotorcompatibilityinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodeffect:29yearsofoversimplification.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.28,396–409.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.28.2.396 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Lien,M.,Schweickert,R.,andProctor,R.W.(2003).Taskswitchingandresponsecorrespondenceinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,692–712.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.692 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Luria,R.,andMeiran,N.(2003).Onlineordercontrolinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,556–574.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.3.556 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Luria,R.,andMeiran,N.(2006).Dualrouteforsubtaskordercontrol:evidencefromthepsychologicalrefractoryparadigm.Q.J.Exp.Psychol.59,720–744.doi:10.1080/02724980543000060 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Magen,H.,andCohen,A.(2005).Locationspecificityinresponseselectionprocessesforvisualstimuli.Psychon.Bull.Rev.12,541–548.doi:10.3758/BF03193802 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Magen,H.,andCohen,A.(2010).Modularitybeyondperception:evidencefromthePRPparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.36,395–414.doi:10.1037/a0017174 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Maquestiaux,F.,Lague-Beauvais,M.,Ruthruff,E.,andBherer,L.(2008).Bypassingthecentralbottleneckaftersingle-taskpracticeinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm:evidencefortaskautomatizationandgreedyresourcerecruitment.Mem.Cogn.36,1262–1282.doi:10.3758/MC.36.7.1262 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Maquestiaux,F.,Lague-Beauvais,M.,Ruthruff,E.,Hartley,A.,andBherer,L.(2010).Learningtobypassthecentralbottleneck:decliningautomaticitywithadvancingage.Psychol.Aging25,177–192.doi:10.1037/a0017122 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Miller,J.(2006).Backwardcrosstalkeffectsinpsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigms:effectsofsecond-taskresponsetypesonfirst-taskresponselatencies.Psychol.Res.70,484–493.doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0011-9 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Miller,J.,andAlderton,M.(2006).Backwardresponse-levelcrosstalkinthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.32,149–165.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.149 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Miller,J.,andReynolds,A.(2003).Thelocusofredundant-targetsandnontargetseffects:evidencefromthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,1126–1142.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.6.1126 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Miller,J.,Ulrich,R.,andRolke,B.(2009).Ontheoptimalityofserialandparallelprocessinginthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm:effectsofthedistributionofstimulusonsetasynchronies.Cogn.Psychol.58,273–310.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.08.003 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Müller,D.,andSchwarz,W.(2007).Exploringthementalnumberline:evidencefromadual-taskparadigm.Psychol.Res.71,598–613.doi:10.1007/s00426-006-0070-6 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar O’Malley,S.,Reynolds,M.G.,Stolz,J.A.,andBesner,D.(2008).Readingaloud:spelling-soundtranslationusescentralattention.J.Exp.Psychol.Learn.Mem.Cogn.34,422–429.doi:10.1037/0278-7393.34.2.422 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Oriet,C.,andJolicoeur,P.(2003).Absenceofperceptualprocessingduringreconfigurationoftaskset.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.29,1036–1049.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.5.1036 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Oriet,C.,andJolicoeur,P.(2008).Differentialcentralresourcedemandsofmemoryscanningandvisualsearch:theroleofconsistentandvariedmapping.Vis.Cogn.16,514–551.doi:10.1080/13506280701252108 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Osman,A.,andMoore,C.M.(1993).Thelocusofdual-taskinterference:psychologicalrefractoryeffectsonmovement-relatedbrainpotentials.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.19,1292–1312.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.19.6.1292 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Paelecke,M.,andKunde,W.(2007).Action-effectcodesinandbeforethecentralbottleneck:evidencefromthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.33,627–644.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.33.3.627 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Pannebakker,M.M.,Band,G.P.H.,andRidderinkhof,K.R.(2009).Operationcompatibility:aneglectedcontributiontodual-taskcosts.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.35,447–460.doi:10.1037/a0013029 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Pashler,H.,Harris,C.R.,andNuechterlein,K.H.(2008).Doesthecentralbottleneckencompassvoluntaryselectionofhedonicallybasedchoices?Exp.Psychol.55,313–321.doi:10.1027/1618-3169.55.5.313 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Pollock,J.W.,Khoja,N.,Kaut,K.P.,Lien,M.,andAllen,P.A.(2012).Electrophysiologicalevidenceforadultage-relatedsparinganddecrementsinemotionperceptionandattention.Front.Integr.Neurosci.6:60.doi:10.3389/fnint.2012.00060 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ricciardelli,P.,andTuratto,M.(2011).Isattentionnecessaryforperceivinggazedirection?Itdependsonhowyoulookatit:evidencefromthelocus-of-slackmethod.Vis.Cogn.19,154–170.doi:10.1080/13506285.2010.514140 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Richards,E.,Tombu,M.,Stolz,J.A.,andJolicoeur,P.(2004).Featuresofperception:exploringtheperceptionofchangeinapsychologicalrefractoryperiodparadigm.Vis.Cogn.11,751–780.doi:10.1080/13506280344000509 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ruthruff,E.,Hazeltine,E.,andRemington,R.W.(2006).Whatcausesresidualdual-taskinterferenceafterpractice?Psychol.Res.70,494–503.doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0012-8 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ruthruff,E.,Johnston,J.C.,andVanSelst,M.(2001).Whypracticereducesdual-taskinterference.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.27,3–21.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.27.1.3 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ruthruff,E.,Miller,J.,andLachmann,T.(1995).Doesmentalrotationrequirecentralmechanisms?J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.21,552–570.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.3.552 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ruthruff,E.,Pashler,H.E.,andHazeltine,E.(2003).Dual-taskinterferencewithequaltaskemphasis:gradedcapacitysharingorcentralpostponement?Percept.Psychophys.65,801–816.doi:10.3758/BF03194816 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schnur,T.T.,andMartin,R.(2012).Semanticpicture–wordinterferenceisapostperceptualeffect.Psychon.Bull.Rev.19,301–308.doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0190-x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schubert,T.,Fischer,R.,andStelzel,C.(2008).Responseactivationinoverlappingtasksandtheresponse-selectionbottleneck.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.34,376–397.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.376 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schuch,S.,andKoch,I.(2004).Thecostsofchangingtherepresentationofaction:responserepetitionandresponse-responsecompatibilityindualtasks.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.30,566–582.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.30.3.566 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schumacher,E.H.,Lauber,E.J.,Glass,J.M.,Zubriggen,E.L.,Gmeindl,L.,Kieras,D.E.,etal.(1999).Concurrentresponse-selectionprocessesindual-taskperformance:evidenceforadaptiveexecutivecontroloftaskscheduling.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.25,791–814.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.25.3.791 CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Schumacher,E.H.,andSchwarb,H.(2009).Parallelresponseselectiondisruptssequencelearningunderdual-taskconditions.J.Exp.Psychol.Gen.138,270–290.doi:10.1037/a0015378 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Shin,Y.,Kyoung,C.,YangSeokLien,M.,andProctor,R.W.(2007).Isthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodeffectforideomotorcompatibletaskseliminatedbyspeed-stressinstructions?Psychol.Res.71,553–567.doi:10.1007/s00426-006-0066-2 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Shin,Y.,andProctor,R.W.(2008).Arespatialresponsestovisuospatialstimuliandspokenresponsestoauditorylettersideomotor-compatibletasks?Examinationofset-sizeeffectsondual-taskinterference.ActaPsychol.129,352–364.doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.09.001 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Stelzel,C.,andSchubert,T.(2011).Interferenceeffectsofstimulus–responsemodalitypairingsindualtasksandtheirrobustness.Psychol.Res.75,476–490.doi:10.1007/s00426-011-0368-x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Töllner,T.,Strobach,T.,Schubert,T.,andMüller,H.J.(2012).Theeffectoftaskorderpredictabilityinaudio-visualdualtaskperformance:justacentralcapacitylimitation?Front.Integr.Neurosci.6:75.doi:10.3389/fnint.2012.00075 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tombu,M.,andJolicoeur,P.(2002a).All-or-nonebottleneckversuscapacitysharingaccountsofthepsychologicalrefractoryperiodphenomenon.Psychol.Res.66,274–286.doi:10.1007/s00426-002-0101-x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tombu,M.,andJolicoeur,P.(2002b).Doessizerescalingrequirecentralattention?Can.J.Exp.Psychol.56,10–17.doi:10.1037/h0087381 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Tombu,M.,andJolicoeur,P.(2005).Testingthepredictionsofthecentralcapacitysharingmodel.J.Exp.Psychol.Hum.Percept.Perform.31,790–802.doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.4.790 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Ulrich,R.,Fernández,S.R.,Jentzsch,I.,Rolke,B.,Schröter,H.,andLeuthold,H.(2006).Motorlimitationindual-taskprocessingunderballisticmovementconditions.Psychol.Sci.17,788–793.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01783.x PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Vachon,F.,andJolicoeur,P.(2012).Ontheautomaticityofsemanticprocessingduringtaskswitching.J.Cogn.Neurosci.24,611–626.doi:10.1162/jocn_a_00149 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Vu,K.L.,andProctor,R.W.(2006).Emergentperceptualfeaturesinthebenefitofconsistentstimulus-responsemappingsondual-taskperformance.Psychol.Res.70,468–483.doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0021-7 PubmedAbstract|PubmedFullText|CrossRefFullText|GoogleScholar Keywords:PRP,dualtasks,capacitylimitation,centralbottlenecktheory,reactiontimes,errordata Citation:StrobachT,SchützAandSchubertT(2015)OntheimportanceofTask1anderrorperformancemeasuresinPRPdual-taskstudies.Front.Psychol.6:403.doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00403 Received:21October2014;Accepted:22March2015;Published:07April2015. Editedby:HannesRuge,TechnischeUniversitätDresden,Germany Reviewedby:EliotHazeltine,UniversityofIowa,USARicoFischer,TechnischeUniversitätDresden,Germany Copyright©2015Strobach,SchützandSchubert.Thisisanopen-accessarticledistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommonsAttributionLicense(CCBY).Theuse,distributionorreproductioninotherforumsispermitted,providedtheoriginalauthor(s)orlicensorarecreditedandthattheoriginalpublicationinthisjournaliscited,inaccordancewithacceptedacademicpractice.Nouse,distributionorreproductionispermittedwhichdoesnotcomplywiththeseterms. *Correspondence:TiloStrobach,DepartmentofPsychology,HumboldtUniversityBerlin,RudowerChaussee18,12489Berlin,[email protected] Peoplealsolookedat Download