Bimanual response grouping in dual-task paradigms

Can frequent long stimulus onset ansynchronies (SOAs) foster the representation of two separated task-sets in dual-tasking?

Recent findings suggest that in dual-tasking the elements of the two tasks are associated across tasks and are stored in a conjoint memory episode, meaning that the tasks are not represented as isolated task-sets. In the current study, we tested whether frequent long stimulus onset ansynchronies (SOAs) can foster the representation of two separated task-sets thereby reducing or even hindering participants to generate conjoint memory episodes-compared to an integrated task-set representation induced by frequent short SOAs. Alternatively, it is conceivable that conjoint memory episodes are an inevitable consequence of presenting two tasks within a single trial. In two dual-task experiments, we tested between consecutive trials whether repeating the stimulus-response bindings of both tasks would lead to faster responses than repeating only one of the two tasks' stimulus-response bindings. The dual-task consisted of a visual-manual search task (VST) and an auditory-manual discrimination task (ADT). Overall, the results suggest that, after processing two tasks within a single trial, generating a conjoint memory episode seems to be a default process, regardless of SOA frequency. However, the respective SOA frequency affected the participants' strategy to group the processing of the two tasks or not, thereby modulating the impact of the reactivated memory episode on task performance.

Brain functional characterization of response-code conflict in dual-tasking and its modulation by age

Crosstalk between conflicting response codes contributes to interference in dual-tasking, an effect exacerbated in advanced age. Here, we investigated (i) brain activity correlates of such response-code conflicts, (ii) activity modulations by individual dual-task performance and related cognitive abilities, (iii) task-modulated connectivity within the task network, and (iv) age-related differences in all these aspects. Young and older adults underwent fMRI while responding to the pitch of tones through spatially mapped speeded button presses with one or two hands concurrently. Using opposing stimulus-response mappings between hands, we induced conflict between simultaneously activated response codes. These response-code conflicts elicited activation in key regions of the multiple-demand network. While thalamic and parietal areas of the conflict-related network were modulated by attentional, working-memory and task-switching abilities, efficient conflict resolution in dual-tasking mainly relied on increasing supplementary motor activity. Older adults showed non-compensatory hyperactivity in left superior frontal gyrus, and higher right premotor activity was modulated by working-memory capacity. Finally, connectivity between premotor or parietal seed regions and the conflict-sensitive network was neither conflict-specific nor age-sensitive. Overall, resolving dual-task response-code conflict recruited substantial parts of the multiple-demand network, whose activity and coupling, however, were only little affected by individual differences in task performance or age.

Response-code conflict in dual-task interference and its modulation by age

Difficulties in performing two tasks at once can arise from several sources and usually increase in advanced age. Tasks with concurrent bimodal (e.g., manual and oculomotor) responding to single stimuli consistently revealed crosstalk between conflicting response codes as a relevant source. However, how this finding translates to unimodal (i.e., manual only) response settings and how it is affected by age remains open. To address this issue, we had young and older adults respond to high- or low-pitched tones with one (single task) or both hands concurrently (dual task). Responses were either compatible or incompatible with the pitch. When responses with the same level of compatibility were combined in dual-task conditions, their response codes were congruent to each other, whereas combining a compatible and an incompatible response created mutually incongruent (i.e., conflicting) response codes, potentially inducing detrimental crosstalk. Across age groups, dual-task costs indeed were overall highest with response-code incongruency. In these trials, compatible responses exhibited higher costs than incompatible ones, even after removing trials with strongly synchronized responses. This underadditive cost asymmetry argues against mutual crosstalk as the sole source of interference and corroborates notions of strategic prioritization of limited processing capacity based on mapping-selection difficulty. As expected, the effects of incongruent response codes were found to be especially deleterious in older adults, supporting assumptions of age-related deficits in multiple-action control at the level of task-shielding. Overall, our results suggest that aging is linked to higher response confusability and less efficient flexibility for capacity sharing in dual-task settings.

Muscle activity in explicit and implicit sequence learning: Exploring additional measures of learning and certainty via tensor decomposition

Sequence learning in serial reaction time tasks (SRTTs) is usually inferred through the reaction time measured by a keyboard. However, this chronometric parameter offers no information beyond the time point of the button-press. We therefore examined whether sequence learning can be measured by muscle activations via electromyography (EMG) in a dual-task paradigm. The primary task was a SRTT, in which the stimuli followed a fixed sequence in some blocks, whereas the sequence was random in the control condition. The secondary task stimulus was always random. One group was informed about the fixed sequence, and the other not. We assessed three dependent variables. The chronometric parameter premotor time represents the duration between stimulus onset and the onset of EMG activity, which indicates the start of the response. The other variables describe the response itself considering the EMG activity after response start. The EMG integral was analyzed, and additionally, tensor decomposition was implemented to assess sequence dependent changes in the contribution of the obtained subcomponents. The results show explicit sequence learning in this dual-task setting. Specifically, the informed group show shorter premotor times in fixed than random sequences as well as larger EMG integral and tensor contributions. Further, increased activity seems to represent response certainty, since a decrease is found for both groups in trials following erroneous responses. Interestingly, the sensitivity to sequence and post-error effects varies between the subcomponents. The results indicate that muscle activity can be a useful indicator of response behavior in addition to chronometric parameters.

Expanding dual-task research by a triple-task

Multitasking research in the laboratory is dominated by extremely simplistic dual-task paradigms. Although dual-tasks allow for some variations, they do not compare well to more complex everyday task settings. This study expands a classical dual-task paradigm by adding a third task. The dual-tasks and the triple-task always consisted of the same three single tasks. The aim was to investigate the effects of the combinations of the three single-tasks and in which manner response times and costs increased. Stimulus-response pairings were varied either once within participants (E1) or between participants (E2). Our results showed that the increase in response time from dual-tasks to triple-tasks was only 43% of the increase from single-tasks to dual-tasks suggesting a non-linear cost of adding tasks. Moreover, response times in each subtask were higher in triple-task situations compared to single-task or dual-task situations. This is in contrast to classical dual-tasks, in which typically only one of the two responses is delayed. Cognitively, for costs in triple-tasks, unlike in dual-tasks, task coordination seems to play a larger role compared to the classically suggested relationships between stimulus and response in terms of their modality- and ideomotor-compatibility which we will discuss. Overall, the study demonstrates that current multitasking research is limited in its generalizability by focusing only on dual-tasks and would benefit from research with more complex task settings.

Gaze and Eye Tracking: Techniques and Applications in ADAS

Tracking drivers’ eyes and gazes is a topic of great interest in the research of advanced driving assistance systems (ADAS). It is especially a matter of serious discussion among the road safety researchers’ community, as visual distraction is considered among the major causes of road accidents. In this paper, techniques for eye and gaze tracking are first comprehensively reviewed while discussing their major categories. The advantages and limitations of each category are explained with respect to their requirements and practical uses. In another section of the paper, the applications of eyes and gaze tracking systems in ADAS are discussed. The process of acquisition of driver’s eyes and gaze data and the algorithms used to process this data are explained. It is explained how the data related to a driver’s eyes and gaze can be used in ADAS to reduce the losses associated with road accidents occurring due to visual distraction of the driver. A discussion on the required features of current and future eye and gaze trackers is also presented.

The Causal Role of the Lateral Prefrontal Cortex for Task-order Coordination in Dual-task Situations: A Study with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Dual tasks are characterized by the requirement for additional task-order coordination processes that schedule the processing order of two temporally overlapping tasks. Preliminary evidence from functional imaging studies suggests that lateral pFC (lPFC) activation correlates with implementing these task-order coordination processes. However, so far, it is unclear whether the lPFC is also causally involved in coordinating task order during dual-task performance and which exact mechanisms are implemented by this brain region. In this study, we addressed these open issues by applying online TMS during a dual-task situation. For this purpose, participants performed a dual task in fixed-order blocks with a constant order of tasks and in random-order block, in which the order of tasks varied randomly and thus demands on task-order coordination were increased. In Experiment 1, TMS of the lPFC compared with control TMS conditions impaired dual-task performance in random-order blocks, whereas performance in fixed-order blocks was unaffected by TMS. In Experiment 2, we tested for the specificity of the lPFC TMS effect on task-order coordination by applying TMS over the preSMA. We showed that preSMA TMS did not affect dual-task performance, neither in fixed-order nor in random-order blocks. Results of this study indicate that the lPFC, but not the preSMA, is causally involved in implementing task-order coordination processes in dual-task situations.

Shielding and relaxation in multitasking: Prospect of reward counteracts relaxation of task shielding in multitasking

Performing two similar tasks at the same time requires the shielding of the prioritized Task 1 from interference of additional Task 2 processing (between-task interference). In the present study we tested how motivational factors such as prospect of reward might drive shifts between increased proactive control, enabling task shielding, and reduced proactive control resulting in relaxed task shielding. In Experiment 1 an instruction-induced prioritization of Task 1 over Task 2 resulted in initially reduced between-task interference. With increasing time on task, however, between-task interference continuously increased, presumably because participants engaged less in proactive control resulting in reduced task shielding. In Experiment 2 the prospect of reward activated proactive control as indicated by reduced between-task interference in the Reward than in the No reward condition. In Experiment 3, we directly compared the performance of a Reward and a No reward group in a between-subject design. Whereas between-task interference again continuously increased over time in the No reward group, indicating a relaxed mode of task shielding, the Reward group displayed constant small between-task interference over time, suggesting maintained high levels of task shielding. Together these findings speak in favor of an impressive flexibility in regulating cognitive control engagement in multitasking situations. This not only shows the capacity for optimization of multitasking performance by motivational incentives but also further supports assumptions of the strategic nature of assumed processing limitations (bottlenecks) in dual-task performance.

Smaller backward crosstalk effects for free choice tasks are not the result of immediate conflict adaptation

In dual-task situations, mutual interference phenomena are often observed. One particularly interesting example of such phenomena is that even Task 1 performance is improved if Task 2 requires a compatible (e.g., both responses are given on the left side) instead of an incompatible response (e.g., one response is given on the right side, and the other on the left side). This is called the compatibility-based backward crosstalk effect (BCE). In a previous paper, we observed support for a critical role of stimulus-response (S-R) links in causing this effect: The BCE was smaller when one of the two tasks was a free choice task. However, an alternative explanation for this observation is that free choice tasks lead to immediate conflict adaptation, thereby reducing the interference from the other task. In the present two experiments, we tested this explanation by varying the amount of conflict assumed to be induced by a free choice task either sequentially (Exp. 1) or block-wise (Exp. 2). While we replicated a sequential modulation of the BCE with two forced choice tasks, we observed (1) no reduction of the BCE induced by (compatible) free choice trials nor (2) an effect of block-wise manipulations of the frequency of free choice trials on the size of the BCE. Thus, while the BCE is sensitive to sequential modulations induced by the (in)compatibility of two forced choice responses, which might point to conflict adaptation, the reduced BCE in dual-task situations involving a free choice task is likely due to its weaker S-R links.

Common Cognitive Control Processes Underlying Performance in Task-Switching and Dual-Task Contexts

In the present study, participants performed highly comparable task-switching and dual-task paradigms, and the paradigm-specific performance costs were analysed in the context of the commonly postulated core components of cognitive control (i.e., working memory updating, inhibition, and shifting). In the task-switching paradigm, we found switch costs (i.e., switch trials vs. repetition trials) and mixing costs (i.e., repetition trials in mixed-task blocks vs. single-task trials). In the dual-task paradigm, we observed a psychological refractory period (PRP) effect (i.e., Task 2 [T2] performance after short stimulus-onset asynchrony [SOA] vs. long SOA), dual-task costs (i.e., T2 dual-task performance with a long SOA in trials with a task repetition between Task 1 [T1] and T2 vs. single-task performance), and switch costs in T2 (i.e., dual-task performance in trials with a switch between T1 and T2 vs. dual-task performance in trials with a repetition between T1 and T2). A within-subjects comparison of the performance costs showed a correlation between mixing costs and dual-task costs, possibly indicating shared underlying cognitive control processes in terms of working memory updating. Surprisingly, there was also a correlation between switch costs and the PRP effect, presumably suggesting that cognitive control, as opposed to passive queuing of response selection processes, contributes to the PRP effect.

More insight into the interplay of response selection and visual attention in dual-tasks: masked visual search and response selection are performed in parallel

Both response selection and visual attention are limited in capacity. According to the central bottleneck model, the response selection processes of two tasks in a dual-task situation are performed sequentially. In conjunction search, visual attention is required to select the items and to bind their features (e.g., color and form), which results in a serial search process. Search time increases as items are added to the search display (i.e., set size effect). When the search display is masked, visual attention deployment is restricted to a brief period of time and target detection decreases as a function of set size. Here, we investigated whether response selection and visual attention (i.e., feature binding) rely on a common or on distinct capacity limitations. In four dual-task experiments, participants completed an auditory Task 1 and a conjunction search Task 2 that were presented with an experimentally modulated temporal interval between them (Stimulus Onset Asynchrony, SOA). In Experiment 1, Task 1 was a two-choice discrimination task and the conjunction search display was not masked. In Experiment 2, the response selection difficulty in Task 1 was increased to a four-choice discrimination and the search task was the same as in Experiment 1. We applied the locus-of-slack method in both experiments to analyze conjunction search time, that is, we compared the set size effects across SOAs. Similar set size effects across SOAs (i.e., additive effects of SOA and set size) would indicate sequential processing of response selection and visual attention. However, a significantly smaller set size effect at short SOA compared to long SOA (i.e., underadditive interaction of SOA and set size) would indicate parallel processing of response selection and visual attention. In both experiments, we found underadditive interactions of SOA and set size. In Experiments 3 and 4, the conjunction search display in Task 2 was masked. Task 1 was the same as in Experiments 1 and 2, respectively. In both experiments, the d' analysis revealed that response selection did not affect target detection. Overall, Experiments 1-4 indicated that neither the response selection difficulty in the auditory Task 1 (i.e., two-choice vs. four-choice) nor the type of presentation of the search display in Task 2 (i.e., not masked vs. masked) impaired parallel processing of response selection and conjunction search. We concluded that in general, response selection and visual attention (i.e., feature binding) rely on distinct capacity limitations.

Stimulus-response links and the backward crosstalk effect - A comparison of forced- and free-choice tasks

In dual-tasks, characteristics of Task 2 responses can already affect performance in the preceding Task 1. This is called the backward crosstalk effect (BCE). To account for the BCE, it has been suggested that the appearance of the Task 2 stimulus automatically projects activation onto the corresponding response through (transient or direct) stimulus-response (S-R) links. One way to investigate this claim is to compare the size of the BCE for tasks where S-R links are differently strong. To this end, we here compared BCEs for forced- vs. free-choice tasks, with the S-R links assumed to be stronger in the former than in the latter task. In Experiments 1 and 2, Task 1 was either forced-choice or free-choice and Task 2 always forced-choice, and in Experiment 3 this order was reversed. A BCE was observed in all experiments with the forced-choice tasks, but in response times it was smaller in Experiments 1 and 2 and absent in Experiment 3 with the free-choice task. However, in free-choice Task 1 responses, a bias towards selecting the response required in Task 2 was observed. These results suggest that the strength of S-R links plays a role in determining the size of the BCE. Relations to other studies and alternative explanations are discussed.

Dissociations of spatial congruence effects across response measures: an examination of delta plots

Spatial congruence ("Simon") effects on reaction time (RT) and response force (RF) were studied in two experiments requiring speeded choice responses to the color of a stimulus located irrelevantly to the left or right of fixation. In Experiment 1 with unimanual responses, both RT and incorrect-hand RF were sensitive to spatial congruence, and both showed larger Simon effects following a congruent trial than following an incongruent one. RT and incorrect-hand RF were dissociated in distributional (i.e., delta plot) analyses, however. As in previous studies, the Simon effect on RT was largest for the fastest responses and diminished as RT increased (i.e., decreasing delta plot). In contrast, Simon effects on RF did not decrease for slower responses; if anything, they increased slightly. In Experiment 2 participants made bimanual responses, allowing measurement of the spatial congruence effect for each trial. Responses were both faster and more forceful with the spatially congruent hand than with the spatially incongruent one, but neither of these effects decreased for slower responses. Overall, the results demonstrate that at least some motor-level effects of irrelevant spatial location persist for slower responses.

A startling acoustic stimulus interferes with upcoming motor preparation: Evidence for a startle refractory period

When a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) is presented in a simple reaction time (RT) task, response latency is significantly shortened. The present study used a SAS in a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm to determine if a shortened RT1 latency would be propagated to RT2. Participants performed a simple RT task with an auditory stimulus (S1) requiring a vocal response (R1), followed by a visual stimulus (S2) requiring a key-lift response (R2). The two stimuli were separated by a variable stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), and a typical PRP effect was found. When S1 was replaced with a 124dB SAS, R1 onset was decreased by 40-50ms; however, rather than the predicted propagation of a shortened RT, significantly longer responses were found for RT2 on startle trials at short SOAs. Furthermore, the 100ms SOA condition exhibited reduced peak EMG for R2 on startle trials, as compared to non-startle trials. These results are attributed to the startling stimulus temporarily interfering with cognitive processing, delaying and altering the execution of the second response. In addition to this "startle refractory period," results also indicated that RT1 latencies were significantly lengthened for trials that immediately followed a startle trial, providing evidence for longer-term effects of the startling stimulus.

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.

Modulation of executive control in dual tasks with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

Executive processing in dual tasks is primarily associated with activation of the lateral prefrontal cortex (lPFC), which is demonstrated in functional imaging studies (e.g., Szameitat et al., 2006). However, a causal relation between lPFC activity and executive functions in dual tasks has not been demonstrated so far. Here, we used anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (atDCS [1 mA, 20 min] vs. sham stimulation [1 mA, 30s]) over the left inferior frontal junction under conditions of random and fixed task order in dual tasks as well as in single tasks in healthy young individuals (Experiment 1). We found that atDCS, if administered simultaneously to the task, improved performance in random-order dual tasks, but not in fixed-order dual tasks and single tasks. Moreover, dual-task performance under random-order conditions did not improve if atDCS was applied prior to the task performance. The identical procedure in Experiment 2 showed no difference in dual-task performance under random-task order conditions when we compared cathodal tDCS (ctDCS) with sham stimulation. Our findings suggest that dual-task performance is causally related to lPFC activation under conditions that require task-order decisions and high demands on executive functioning. Subsequent studies may now explore if atDCS leads to sustained improvements parallel to the training of dual tasks.

Control of task sequences: what is the role of language?

It is almost a truism that language aids serial-order control through self-cuing of upcoming sequential elements. We measured speech onset latencies as subjects performed hierarchically organized task sequences while "thinking aloud" each task label. Surprisingly, speech onset latencies and response times (RTs) were highly synchronized, a pattern that is not consistent with the hypothesis that speaking aids proactive retrieval of upcoming sequential elements during serial-order control. We also found that when instructed to do so, subjects were able to speak task labels prior to presentation of response-relevant stimuli and that this substantially reduced RT signatures of retrieval-however, at the cost of more sequencing errors. Thus, while proactive retrieval is possible in principle, in natural situations it seems to be prevented through a strong "gestalt-like" tendency to synchronize speech and action. We suggest that this tendency may support context updating rather than proactive control.

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.

Nonselective motor-level changes associated with selective response inhibition: evidence from response force measurements

In the present study, we examined the effects of selective response inhibition on motor production using response force measures within a task that was based on that of Aron and Verbruggen (Psychological Science, 19, 1146-1153, 2008). In each trial, participants were signaled to respond bimanually with the two index fingers or the two middle fingers. After a short delay, a stop signal was sometimes presented, indicating that one of the two finger responses should be withheld. A given response was slowed when the response on the other hand was stopped, replicating a previously observed stopping interference effect. In addition, the given response was also made more forcefully when the response on the other hand was stopped, indicating that the requirement to stop one activated response has global motor-level consequences for other responses that are to be carried out normally.

Determinants of central processing order in psychological refractory period paradigms: central arrival times, detection times, or preparation?

Three psychological refractory period (PRP) experiments were conducted to assess the effect of central arrival times at the bottleneck on task order scheduling. In Experiment 1, a visual first task (plus-minus symbol discrimination) was combined with an auditory second task (left-right tone judgement) in a standard PRP paradigm with constant task order. In Experiment 2, the order of the tasks varied unpredictably. In Experiment 3, visual-auditory dual-task trials were randomly mixed with single-task trials. To dissociate central arrival times from stimulus detection times, the perceptual stage of the visual task was extended using stimulus degradation. Most importantly, no evidence for a first-come, first-served principle at the central bottleneck was found with the employed paradigms. Instead, the results indicated that preparation (Experiment 1) and the detection times of the stimuli (Experiments 2 and 3) were the main determinants of central processing order in the present study. In the light of previous research, the results indicate that central processing order can be influenced by various factors. The interplay between these factors seems to depend highly on the conditions and requirements of the employed experimental paradigm.

A PRP-study to determine the locus of target priming effects

Visual stimuli that are made invisible by a following mask can nonetheless affect motor responses. To localize the origin of these target priming effects we used the psychological refractory period paradigm. Participants classified tones as high or low, and responded to the position of a visual target that was preceded by a prime. The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between both tasks varied. In Experiment 1 the tone task was followed by the position task and SOA dependent target priming effects were observed. When the visual position task preceded the tone task in Experiment 2, with short SOA the priming effect propagated entirely to the tone task yielding faster responses to tones on visually congruent trials and delayed responses to tones on visually incongruent trials. Together, results suggest that target priming effects arise from processing before and at the level of the central bottleneck such as sensory analysis and response selection.

Performance degradation and altered cerebral activation during dual performance: evidence for a bottom-up attentional system

Subjects performed a continuous tracking concurrently with an intermittent visual detection task to investigate the existence of competition for a capacity-limited stage (a bottleneck stage). Both perceptual and response-related processes between the two tasks were examined behaviorally and the changes in brain activity during dual-tasking relative to single-task were also assessed. Tracking error and joystick speed were analyzed for changes that were time-locked to visual detection stimuli. The associated brain activations were examined with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). These were analyzed using mixed block and event-related models to tease apart sustained neural activity and activations associated with individual events. Increased tracking error and decreased joystick speed were observed relative to the target stimuli in the dual-task condition only, which supports the existence of a bottleneck stage in response-related processes. Neuroimaging data show decreased activation to target relative to non-target stimuli in the dual-task condition in the left primary motor and somatosensory cortices controlling right-hand tracking, consistent with the tracking interference observed in behavioral data. Furthermore, the ventral attention system, rather than the dorsal attention system, was found to mediate task coordination between tracking and visual detection.