The specificity of learned parallelism in dual-memory retrieval

Age does not modify the processing architecture of dual memory retrieval: an investigation of age-related effects on dual-retrieval practice in younger and older adults

The present study investigated the cognitive processing architecture of dual(-memory) retrieval from a single cue across two distinct age groups: younger and older adults. Previous research has shown that younger adults can exhibit learned parallel retrieval, but only if they synchronize response execution. This phenomenon has not been demonstrated with older adults. Experiment 1 functioned as an extension of previous studies to assess whether the finding of learned retrieval parallelism in younger adults could be observed in older adults as well. The experiment used a dual retrieval task that involved the retrieval of two responses, one vocal and one keypress, from a single cue. Experiment 2 further assessed whether the cognitive processing architecture underlying the occurrence of learned retrieval parallelism in dual memory retrieval could be influenced by the number of cues in single-retrieval practice. The results of both experiments showed that learned retrieval parallelism occurs in older as well as younger adults and that the processing mechanisms involved in dual memory retrieval are relatively stable across age groups.

Structuralist mental representation of dual-action demands: Evidence for compositional coding from dual tasks with low cross-task dimensional overlap

The present study asks how behavioral (dual-action) demands in dual tasks are mentally represented and whether changes in representation might govern practice-related dual-task performance improvements. Three different representation accounts were empirically tested based on the idea that dual-action demands required in a dual-task trial might be represented in different ways. According to a compositional (Structuralist) account, component tasks remain structurally intact when combined with another task. In contrast, a holistic (Gestalt) account posits that dual-action requirements in dual tasks are represented holistically and entirely distinct from its component action requirements. Finally, a contextual change account assumes that a change in context (e.g., from single- to dual-action requirement) generally impedes response retrieval, similar to repeating a response while the task context switches. To address this issue, we analyzed trial-by-trial effects in a single/dual switch paradigm (SDS paradigm, involving a randomized mix of single- and dual-task trials within blocks). Specifically, we analyzed performance in an extensive dual-task training setting (involving training sessions across several days) combining an auditory-vocal task and a visual-manual task. The results indicated that, throughout practice, nearly all relevant comparisons of performance between complete switch trials (e.g., between the two single tasks) and partial repetition trials (e.g., from dual to single task) revealed partial repetition benefits, that is, for both the auditory-vocal and the visual-manual task, and for both single- and dual-task performance analyses. Therefore, dual-action requirements in the present dual-task setting are mentally represented in a compositional, Structuralist fashion, probably due to low between-task dimensional overlap.

Structuralist Mental Representation of Dual-action Demands: Mechanisms of Improved Dual-task Performance after Practice in Older Adults

Aim: The present study was designed to investigate how behavioral (dual-action) demands in dual tasks are mentally represented in older adults and how these representations might contribute to the practice-related improvement of dual-task performance. Three different theoretical representation accounts were empirically tested: a structuralist account, a holistic account, and a contextual change account. The first account assumes that component tasks remain structurally intact when combined with another task while the second account assumes that dual-action requirements in dual tasks are represented holistically and entirely distinct from its component (single-action) requirements. The final account assumes that a change in context (e.g., from single to dual requirement) might generally impede response retrieval, similar to repeating a response when the task context switches. Methods: To address this issue of dual-action representations in older adults, we assessed trial-by-trial effects in a single/dual switch paradigm (involving a randomized mix of single- and dual-task trials within blocks). In detail, we re-analyzed a large set of practice data involving seven sessions, in which an auditory-vocal task was combined with a visual-manual task.  Results: At the end of practice, the current results were largely consistent with the structuralist account.  Conclusions: We conclude that dual-action requirements in the present dual-task setting are mentally represented in a predominantly structuralist fashion at the end of practice in older adults. The results are discussed in the context of other theories on practice-related mechanisms of improved dual-task performance in this age group.

Dual-memory retrieval efficiency after practice: effects of strategy manipulations

The study investigated practice effects, instruction manipulations, and the associated cognitive architecture of dual-memory retrieval from a single cue. In two experiments, we tested predictions about the presence of learned parallelism in dual-memory retrieval within the framework of the set-cue bottleneck model. Both experiments included three experimental laboratory sessions and involved computerized assessments of dual-memory retrieval performance with strategy instruction manipulations. In Experiment 1, subjects were assigned to three distinct dual-task practice instruction groups: (1) a neutral instruction group without a specific direction on how to solve the task (i.e., neutral instruction), (2) an instruction to synchronize the responses (i.e., synchronize instruction), and (3) an instruction to use a sequential response style (i.e., immediate instruction). Results indicate that strategy instructions are able to effectively influence dual retrieval during practice. Mainly, the instruction to synchronize responses led to the presence of learned retrieval parallelism. Experiment 2 provided an assessment of the cognitive processing architecture of dual-memory retrieval. The results provide support for the presence of a structural bottleneck that cannot be eliminated by extensive practice and instruction manipulations. Further results are discussed with respect to the set-cue bottleneck model.

Two retrievals from a single cue: A bottleneck persists across episodic and semantic memory

There is evidence in the literature that two retrievals from long-term memory cannot occur in parallel. To date, however, that work has explored only the case of two retrievals from newly acquired episodic memory. These studies demonstrated a retrieval bottleneck even after dual-retrieval practice. That retrieval bottleneck may be a global property of long-term memory retrieval, or it may apply only to the case of two retrievals from episodic memory. In the current experiments, we explored whether that apparent dual-retrieval bottleneck applies to the case of one retrieval from episodic memory and one retrieval from highly overlearned semantic memory. Across three experiments, subjects learned to retrieve a left or right keypress response form a set of 14 unique word cues (e.g., black—right keypress). In addition, they learned a verbal response which involved retrieving the antonym of the presented cue (e.g., black—“white”). In the dual-retrieval condition, subjects had to retrieve both the keypress response and the antonym word. The results suggest that the retrieval bottleneck is superordinate to specific long-term memory systems and holds across different memory components. In addition, the results support the assumption of a cue-level response chunking account of learned retrieval parallelism.

On the Automaticity of Familiarity in Short-term Recognition: A Test of the Dual-Process Assumption with the PRP Paradigm

Dual-process models of recognition often assume that one retrieval process, generating a familiarity signal, is automatic, whereas the other, recollection, is controlled. Four experiments are presented to test for automaticity of familiarity in a short-term recognition task. The experiments use the Psychological Refractory Period (PRP) paradigm to assess whether familiarity requires central processing capacity. Task 1 was an oral tone-classification task. Task 2 was a local-recognition task, in which participants decided whether a probe matched a particular item in the memory set, identified by its screen location. Intrusion probes, matching an item of the memory set in a different location, were slower and more difficult to reject than new probes. The size of this intrusion cost reflects the influence of familiarity on recognition. In all four experiments the size of the intrusion cost was additive with the stimulus-onset-asynchrony (SOA) of Task 1 and Task 2, demonstrating that extraction of familiarity requires central capacity. In addition, Experiment 2 showed additive effects of memory set size and serial position with SOA, confirming that recollection, too, requires central capacity. Experiments 3A and 3B compared a condition including new probes to one including only positive and intrusion probes; in the latter condition the familiarity signal was completely uninformative. Participants showed some ability to reduce the influence of familiarity when it was completely uninformative, but only when they were explicitly told to do so (Experiment 3B). To conclude, by one criterion familiarity is a controlled process: It demands central processing capacity. It might also be controlled by another criterion: People can intentionally reduce the influence of familiarity on recognition decision, but they fail to do so spontaneously even when it would be advantageous. All raw data are available on the Open Science Framework: osf.io/7pr72.

Mechanisms of Practice-Related Reductions of Dual-Task Interference with Simple Tasks: Data and Theory

In dual-task situations, interference between two simultaneous tasks impairs performance. With practice, however, this impairment can be reduced. To identify mechanisms leading to a practice-related improvement in sensorimotor dual tasks, the present review applied the following general hypothesis: Sources that impair dual-task performance at the beginning of practice are associated with mechanisms for the reduction of dual-task impairment at the end of practice. The following types of processes provide sources for the occurrence of this impairment: (a) capacity-limited processes within the component tasks, such as response-selection or motor response stages, and (b) cognitive control processes independent of these tasks and thus operating outside of component-task performance. Dual-task practice studies show that, under very specific conditions, capacity-limited processes within the component tasks are automatized with practice, reducing the interference between two simultaneous tasks. Further, there is evidence that response-selection stages are shortened with practice. Thus, capacity limitations at these stages are sources for dual-task costs at the beginning of practice and are overcome with practice. However, there is no evidence demonstrating the existence of practice-related mechanisms associated with capacity-limited motor-response stages. Further, during practice, there is an acquisition of executive control skills for an improved allocation of limited attention resources to two tasks as well as some evidence supporting the assumption of improved task coordination. These latter mechanisms are associated with sources of dual-task interference operating outside of component task performance at the beginning of practice and also contribute to the reduction of dual-task interference at its end.

Evidence for the acquisition of dual-task coordination skills in older adults

Practicing two simultaneously presented tasks in dual-task situations results in improved dual-task performance, in both younger and older adults. Recent findings with younger adults demonstrated that this improvement is attributable in part to improved task coordination skills acquired through practice. However, it is unclear whether practice also improves older adults' skills at dual-task coordination. To clarify this, the present study examined the acquisition of task coordination skills, reflecting one specific mechanism of practice-dependent improvement in dual-task performance for this particular age group. This examination was based on two assumptions, namely, that (1) these skills are acquired during practice of the tasks presented simultaneously (dual-task situations), but not during the separate practice of the two tasks (single-task situations), and (2), rather than being dependent on the specific properties of practiced tasks, these skills are transferable to new dual-task situations. In the context of dual-task situations with well-structured reaction-time tasks, the results indeed revealed improved dual-task performance following dual-task practice, as compared to single-task practice, in both the practiced dual-task and new dual-task (transfer) situations. These findings are consistent with the notion that, similar to younger adults, acquired task coordination skills represent one practice-related mechanism that contributes to improved dual-task performance in the age group of older adults.

When two actions are easier than one: how inhibitory control demands affect response processing

Numerous studies showed that the simultaneous execution of multiple actions is associated with performance costs. Here, we demonstrate that when highly automatic responses are involved, performance in single-response conditions can actually be worse than in dual-response conditions. Participants responded to peripheral visual stimuli with an eye movement (saccade), a manual key press, or both. To manipulate saccade automaticity, a central fixation cross either remained present throughout the trial (overlap condition, lower automaticity) or disappeared 200 ms before visual target onset (gap condition, greater automaticity). Crucially, single-response conditions yielded more performance errors than dual-response conditions (i.e., dual-response benefit), especially in gap trials. This was due to difficulties associated with inhibiting saccades when only manual responses were required, suggesting that response inhibition (remaining fixated) can be even more resource-demanding than overt response execution (saccade to peripheral target).