Emergent perceptual features in the benefit of consistent stimulus-response mappings on dual-task performance

On the importance of Task 1 and error performance measures in PRP dual-task studies

The psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm is a dominant research tool in the literature on dual-task performance. In this paradigm a first and second component task (i.e., Task 1 and Task 2) are presented with variable stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) and priority to perform Task 1. The main indicator of dual-task impairment in PRP situations is an increasing Task 2-RT with decreasing SOAs. This impairment is typically explained with some task components being processed strictly sequentially in the context of the prominent central bottleneck theory. This assumption could implicitly suggest that processes of Task 1 are unaffected by Task 2 and bottleneck processing, i.e., decreasing SOAs do not increase reaction times (RTs) and error rates of the first task. The aim of the present review is to assess whether PRP dual-task studies included both RT and error data presentations and statistical analyses and whether studies including both data types (i.e., RTs and error rates) show data consistent with this assumption (i.e., decreasing SOAs and unaffected RTs and/or error rates in Task 1). This review demonstrates that, in contrast to RT presentations and analyses, error data is underrepresented in a substantial number of studies. Furthermore, a substantial number of studies with RT and error data showed a statistically significant impairment of Task 1 performance with decreasing SOA. Thus, these studies produced data that is not primarily consistent with the strong assumption that processes of Task 1 are unaffected by Task 2 and bottleneck processing in the context of PRP dual-task situations; this calls for a more careful report and analysis of Task 1 performance in PRP studies and for a more careful consideration of theories proposing additions to the bottleneck assumption, which are sufficiently general to explain Task 1 and Task 2 effects.

Stimulus–response compatibility for mixed mappings and tasks with unique responses

For two stimulus locations mapped to two keypresses, reaction time is shorter when the mapping is compatible than when it is not (the stimulus–response compatibility, SRC, effect). A similar result, called the Simon effect, occurs when stimulus location is irrelevant, and colour is relevant. When compatibly mapped trials are intermixed with incompatibly mapped trials or Simon task trials, the compatibility effect is eliminated, and the Simon effect is influenced by the location mapping. In five experiments, we examined whether similar mixing effects occur when the two spatial mappings or location-relevant and location-irrelevant tasks use distinct keypresses on the left and right hands. Mixing had considerably less influence on the SRC and Simon effects than it does when the intermixed trial types or tasks share the same responses, even though response time was lengthened to a similar extent. Mixing two tasks for which stimulus location was irrelevant yielded no within-task Simon effect, but the effect was also absent when four stimuli were assigned to two responses on a single hand. The relative lack of influence of mixing on the SRC and Simon effects when the tasks have unique responses implies that suppression of direct activation of the corresponding response occurs primarily when the tasks share responses.