Item-specific proportion congruency (ISPC) modulates, but does not generate, the backward crosstalk effect

Electrophysiological evidence against parallel motor processing during multitasking

We combined behavioral measures with electrophysiological measures of motor activation (i.e., lateralized readiness potentials, LRPs) to disentangle the relative contribution of premotor and motor processes to multitasking interference in the prioritized processing paradigm. Specifically, we presented stimuli of two tasks (primary and background task) in each trial, but participants were instructed to perform the background task only if the primary task required no response. As expected, task performance was substantially influenced by a task probability manipulation: Background task responses were faster, psychological refractory period effects were smaller, and interference from the second task (i.e., backward compatibility effects) was larger when there was a larger probability that this task required a response. Critically, stimulus-locked and response-locked LRP analyses indicate that these behavioral effects of parallel processing were not driven by background task motor processing (e.g., motoric response activation) taking place during primary task processing. Instead, the LRP results suggest that these effects were exclusively localized during premotor stages of processing (e.g., response selection). Thus, the present results generally provide evidence for multitasking accounts allowing parallel task processing during response selection, whereas the task-specific motor responses are activated in a serial manner. One plausible account is that multiple task information sources can be processed in parallel, with sharing of limited cognitive resources depending on task relevance, but a primary and still active task goal prevents motor activation related to the goals of other tasks in order to avoid outcome conflict.

The Backward Crosstalk Effect Does Not Depend on the Degree of a Preceding Response Conflict

A common observation in dual tasking is a performance decrement in one or both tasks compared with single tasking. Besides, more specific interference occurs depending on certain characteristics of the two tasks. In particular, even Task 1 performance is often improved when responses in both tasks are compatible (e.g., both require left responses) compared to when they are incompatible: the compatibility-based backward crosstalk effect (BCE). Similar to what is observed for conflict tasks, the BCE is sequentially modulated: It is larger following compatible than following incompatible trials. Previous work has attributed this observation to adaptation effects triggered by response conflict arising during incompatible trials. In two experiments, we assessed sequential modulations following trials with different degrees of such a response conflict. In contrast to our expectations, a clear and sizeable sequential modulation was observed even under conditions where no BCE, and thus no empirical sign of an objective response conflict, was present in the previous trial. Therefore, our results show sequential modulations even without prior response conflict, which is not the (sole) trigger of sequential modulations accordingly. We discuss these results with regard to other potential triggers such as the subjective experience of conflict or difficulty, episodic retrieval, and repetitions of response combinations.