The trickle-down effect of predictability: Secondary task performance benefits from predictability in the primary task

Gaze behavior in response to affect during natural social interactions

Attention in social interactions is directed by social cues such as the face or eye region of an interaction partner. Several factors that influence these attentional biases have been identified in the past. However, most findings are based on paradigms with static stimuli and no interaction potential. Therefore, the current study investigated the influence of one of these factors, namely facial affect in natural social interactions using an evaluated eye-tracking setup. In a sample of 35 female participants, we examined how individuals' gaze behavior responds to changes in the facial affect of an interaction partner trained in affect modulation. Our goal was to analyze the effects on attention to facial features and to investigate their temporal dynamics in a natural social interaction. The study results, obtained from both aggregated and dynamic analyses, indicate that facial affect has only subtle influences on gaze behavior during social interactions. In a sample with high measurement precision, these findings highlight the difficulties of capturing the subtleties of social attention in more naturalistic settings. The methodology used in this study serves as a foundation for future research on social attention differences in more ecologically valid scenarios.

The impact of predictability on dual-task performance and implications for resource-sharing accounts

The aim of this study was to examine the impact of predictability on dual-task performance by systematically manipulating predictability in either one of two tasks, as well as between tasks. According to capacity-sharing accounts of multitasking, assuming a general pool of resources two tasks can draw upon, predictability should reduce the need for resources and allow more resources to be used by the other task. However, it is currently not well understood what drives resource-allocation policy in dual tasks and which resource allocation policies participants pursue. We used a continuous tracking task together with an audiomotor task and manipulated advance visual information about the tracking path in the first experiment and a sound sequence in the second experiments (2a/b). Results show that performance predominantly improved in the predictable task but not in the unpredictable task, suggesting that participants did not invest more resources into the unpredictable task. One possible explanation was that the re-investment of resources into another task requires some relationship between the tasks. Therefore, in the third experiment, we covaried the two tasks by having sounds 250 ms before turning points in the tracking curve. This enabled participants to improve performance in both tasks, suggesting that resources were shared better between tasks.

How visual information influences dual-task driving and tracking

The study examined the impact of visual predictability on dual-task performance in driving and tracking tasks. Participants (N = 27) performed a simulated driving task and a pursuit tracking task. In either task, visual predictability was manipulated by systematically varying the amount of advance visual information: in the driving task, participants drove at night with low beam, at night with high beam, or in daylight; in the tracking task, participants saw a white line that specified the future target trajectory for 200, 400 or 800 ms. Concurrently with driving or tracking, participants performed an auditory task. They had to discriminate between two sounds and press a pedal upon hearing the higher sound. Results show that in general, visual predictability benefited driving and tracking; however, dual-task driving performance was best with highest visual predictability (daylight), dual-task tracking performance was best with medium visual predictability (400 ms). Braking/reaction times were higher in dual tasks compared to single tasks, but were unaffected by visual predictability, showing that its beneficial effects did not transfer to the auditory task. In both tasks, manual accuracy decreased around the moment the foot pressed the pedal, indicating interference between tasks. We, therefore, conclude that despite a general beneficial impact of predictability, the integration of visual information seems to be rather task specific, and that interference between driving and audiomotor tasks, and tracking and audiomotor tasks, seems comparable.