Effects of task probability on prioritized processing: Modulating the efficiency of parallel response selection

Four experiments investigated the extent to which a limited pool of resources can be shared between different tasks performed simultaneously when it is efficient to do so. The experiments used a prioritized processing paradigm, in which stimuli for both a primary task and a background task were presented in each trial. If the primary-task stimulus required a response in a trial, participants made only that response. If the primary-task stimulus did not require a response, participants responded to the background task. The main manipulation was the relative probability that a response would be required to the primary versus background task. In some blocks, the majority of trials required responses to the primary task (Experiments 1 and 2: 80%; Experiments 3 and 4: 60%), whereas in other blocks the majority required responses to the background task. Background-task responses were substantially faster in blocks where they were more likely to be required, consistent with the idea that more capacity was allocated to them in these blocks. Backward compatibility effects on primary-task responses and stimulus-onset asynchrony effects on background-task responses provided further evidence of greater capacity allocation to the background task when there was a higher probability of responding to it. The results support the view that two tasks can be processed in parallel, with resources divided between them, when it is efficient to do so.

Parallel and serial task processing in the PRP paradigm: a drift-diffusion model approach

Even after a long time of research on dual-tasking, the question whether the two tasks are always processed serially (response selection bottleneck models, RSB) or also in parallel (capacity-sharing models) is still going on. The first models postulate that the central processing stages of two tasks cannot overlap, producing a central processing bottleneck in Task 2. The second class of models posits that cognitive resources are shared between the central processing stages of two tasks, allowing for parallel processing. In a series of three experiments, we aimed at inducing parallel vs. serial processing by manipulating the relative frequency of short vs. long SOAs (Experiments 1 and 2) and including no-go trials in Task 2 (Experiment 3). Beyond the conventional response time (RT) analyses, we employed drift–diffusion model analyses to differentiate between parallel and serial processing. Even though our findings were rather consistent across the three experiments, they neither support unambiguously the assumptions derived from the RSB model nor those derived from capacity-sharing models. SOA frequency might lead to an adaptation to frequent time patterns. Overall, our diffusion model results and mean RTs seem to be better explained by participant’s time expectancies.

Cross-modal psychological refractory period in vision, audition, and haptics

People's parallel-processing ability is limited, as demonstrated by the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect: The reaction time to the second stimulus (RT2) increases as the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between two stimuli decreases. Most theoretical models of PRP are independent of modalities. Previous research on PRP mainly focused on vision and audition as input modalities; tactile stimuli have not been fully explored. Research using other paradigms and involving tactile stimuli, however, found that dual-task performance depended on input modalities. This study explored PRP with all the combinations of input modalities. Thirty participants judged the magnitude (small or large) of two stimuli presented in different modalities with an SOA of 75-1,200 ms. PRP effect was observed, i.e., RT2 increased with a decreasing SOA, in all the modalities. Only in the auditory-tactile condition did the accuracy of Task 2 decrease with a decreasing SOA. In the auditory-tactile and tactile-visual conditions, RT to the first stimulus also increased with a decreasing SOA. Current models could only explain part of the results, and modality characteristics help to explain the overall data pattern better. Limitations and directions for future studies regarding reaction time, task difficulty, and response modalities are discussed.

Mobilizing cognition for speeded action: try-harder instructions promote motivated readiness in the constant-foreperiod paradigm

We examined the effect of motivational readiness on cognitive performance. An important but still not sufficiently elaborated question is whether individuals can voluntarily increase cognitive efficiency for an impending target event, given sufficient preparation time. Within the framework of the constant-foreperiod design (comparing reaction time performance in blocks of short and long foreperiod intervals, FPs), we examined the effect of an instruction to try harder (instructional cue: standard vs. effort) in a choice-reaction task on performance speed and variability. Proceeding from previous theoretical considerations, we expected the instruction to speed-up processing irrespective of FP length, while error rate should be increased in the short-FP but decreased in the long-FP condition. Overall, the results confirmed this prediction. Importantly, the distributional (ex-Gaussian and delta plot) analysis revealed that the instruction to try harder decreased distributional skewness (i.e., longer percentiles were more affected), indicating that mobilization ensured temporal performance stability (persistence).

Age-related emotional bias in processing two emotionally valenced tasks

Previous studies suggest that older adults process positive emotions more efficiently than negative emotions, whereas younger adults show the reverse effect. We examined whether this age-related difference in emotional bias still occurs when attention is engaged in two emotional tasks. We used a psychological refractory period paradigm and varied the emotional valence of Task 1 and Task 2. In both experiments, Task 1 was emotional face discrimination (happy vs. angry faces) and Task 2 was sound discrimination (laugh, punch, vs. cork pop in Experiment 1 and laugh vs. scream in Experiment 2). The backward emotional correspondence effect for positively and negatively valenced Task 2 on Task 1 was measured. In both experiments, younger adults showed a backward correspondence effect from a negatively valenced Task 2, suggesting parallel processing of negatively valenced stimuli. Older adults showed similar negativity bias in Experiment 2 with a more salient negative sound ("scream" relative to "punch"). These results are consistent with an arousal-bias competition model [Mather and Sutherland (Perspectives in Psychological Sciences 6:114-133, 2011)], suggesting that emotional arousal modulates top-down attentional control settings (emotional regulation) with age.

The source of dual-task limitations: serial or parallel processing of multiple response selections?

Although it is generally recognized that the concurrent performance of two tasks incurs costs, the sources of these dual-task costs remain controversial. The serial bottleneck model suggests that serial postponement of task performance in dual-task conditions results from a central stage of response selection that can only process one task at a time. Cognitive-control models, by contrast, propose that multiple response selections can proceed in parallel, but that serial processing of task performance is predominantly adopted because its processing efficiency is higher than that of parallel processing. In the present study, we empirically tested this proposition by examining whether parallel processing would occur when it was more efficient and financially rewarded. The results indicated that even when parallel processing was more efficient and was incentivized by financial reward, participants still failed to process tasks in parallel. We conclude that central information processing is limited by a serial bottleneck.

Evidence for a response preparation bottleneck during dual-task performance: effect of a startling acoustic stimulus on the psychological refractory period

The present study was designed to investigate the mechanism associated with dual-task interference in a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm. We used a simple reaction time paradigm consisting of a vocal response (R1) and key-lift task (R2) with a stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between 100ms and 1500ms. On selected trials we implemented a startling acoustic stimulus concurrent with the second stimulus to determine if we could involuntarily trigger the second response. Our results indicated that the PRP delay in the second response was present for both control and startle trials at short SOAs, suggesting the second response was not prepared in advance. These results support a response preparation bottleneck and can be explained via a neural activation model of preparation. In addition, we found that the reflexive startle activation was reduced in the dual-task condition for all SOAs, a result we attribute to prepulse inhibition associated with dual-task processing.

The functional neuroanatomy of multitasking: combining dual tasking with a short term memory task

Insight into the neural architecture of multitasking is crucial when investigating the pathophysiology of multitasking deficits in clinical populations. Presently, little is known about how the brain combines dual-tasking with a concurrent short-term memory task, despite the relevance of this mental operation in daily life and the frequency of complaints related to this process, in disease. In this study we aimed to examine how the brain responds when a memory task is added to dual-tasking. Thirty-three right-handed healthy volunteers (20 females, mean age 39.9 ± 5.8) were examined with functional brain imaging (fMRI). The paradigm consisted of two cross-modal single tasks (a visual and auditory temporal same-different task with short delay), a dual-task combining both single tasks simultaneously and a multi-task condition, combining the dual-task with an additional short-term memory task (temporal same-different visual task with long delay). Dual-tasking compared to both individual visual and auditory single tasks activated a predominantly right-sided fronto-parietal network and the cerebellum. When adding the additional short-term memory task, a larger and more bilateral frontoparietal network was recruited. We found enhanced activity during multitasking in components of the network that were already involved in dual-tasking, suggesting increased working memory demands, as well as recruitment of multitask-specific components including areas that are likely to be involved in online holding of visual stimuli in short-term memory such as occipito-temporal cortex. These results confirm concurrent neural processing of a visual short-term memory task during dual-tasking and provide evidence for an effective fMRI multitasking paradigm.

Electrophysiological evidence for adult age-related sparing and decrements in emotion perception and attention

The present study examined adult age differences in processing emotional faces using a psychological refractory period paradigm. We used both behavioral and event-related potential (P1 component) measures. Task 1 was tone discrimination (fuzzy vs. pure tones) and Task 2 was emotional facial discrimination (“happy” vs. “angry” faces). The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the two tasks was 100, 300, and 900 ms. Earlier research observed larger age deficits in emotional facial discrimination for negative (angry) than for positive (happy) faces (Baena et al., 2010). Thus, we predicted that older adults would show decreased attentional efficiency in carrying out dual-task processing on the P1 (a component linked to amygdalar modulation of visual perception; Rotshtein et al., 2010). Both younger and older groups showed significantly higher P1 amplitudes at 100- and 300-ms SOAs than at the 900-ms SOA, and this suggests that both age groups could process Task 2 faces without central attention. Also, younger adults showed significantly higher P1 activations for angry than for happy faces, but older adults showed no difference. These results are consistent with the idea that younger adults exhibited amygdalar modulation of visual perception, but that older adults did not.