Cargando…

Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking

The usual way of thinking about dual-tasking is that the participants represent the two tasks separately. However, several findings suggest that the participants rather seem to integrate the elements of both tasks into a conjoint episode. In three experiments, we aimed at further testing this task i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Pelzer, Lasse, Naefgen, Christoph, Gaschler, Robert, Haider, Hilde
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10192196/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35948687
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01713-8
_version_ 1785043578208124928
author Pelzer, Lasse
Naefgen, Christoph
Gaschler, Robert
Haider, Hilde
author_facet Pelzer, Lasse
Naefgen, Christoph
Gaschler, Robert
Haider, Hilde
author_sort Pelzer, Lasse
collection PubMed
description The usual way of thinking about dual-tasking is that the participants represent the two tasks separately. However, several findings suggest that the participants rather seem to integrate the elements of both tasks into a conjoint episode. In three experiments, we aimed at further testing this task integration account in dual-tasking. To this end, we investigated how the processing of the previous Trial n-1 shapes the processing of the current Trial n. We observed performance benefits when the stimulus–response mappings of both tasks repeat in consecutive trials (full repetition: FR) as compared to when only one such mapping repeats (partial repetition: PR). In particular, our experiments focused on the question which elements of the two tasks in dual-tasking might be bound together. For this purpose, in Experiments 1 and 2, all participants performed a dual-task consisting of a visual–manual search task (VST) and an auditory–manual discrimination task (ADT). In the VST the stimulus–response mappings were variable, so that none of the stimuli of this task systematically predicted a certain response. In Experiment 1, the stimuli and responses of the VST were either both repeated or both changed in consecutive trials. In Experiment 2, we removed the stimulus repetitions in the VST and only the responses repeated across trials. In Experiment 3, we changed the ADT into a visual–auditory matching task (VAMT) with variable stimulus–response mappings, so that in both tasks only the responses repeated across trials. In Experiments 1 and 2, we observed better performance for FR than for PR, while this difference disappeared in Experiment 3. Together, the results suggest that the stimulus of one task is sufficient to retrieve the entire episode from the previous trial.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10192196
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101921962023-05-19 Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking Pelzer, Lasse Naefgen, Christoph Gaschler, Robert Haider, Hilde Psychol Res Original Article The usual way of thinking about dual-tasking is that the participants represent the two tasks separately. However, several findings suggest that the participants rather seem to integrate the elements of both tasks into a conjoint episode. In three experiments, we aimed at further testing this task integration account in dual-tasking. To this end, we investigated how the processing of the previous Trial n-1 shapes the processing of the current Trial n. We observed performance benefits when the stimulus–response mappings of both tasks repeat in consecutive trials (full repetition: FR) as compared to when only one such mapping repeats (partial repetition: PR). In particular, our experiments focused on the question which elements of the two tasks in dual-tasking might be bound together. For this purpose, in Experiments 1 and 2, all participants performed a dual-task consisting of a visual–manual search task (VST) and an auditory–manual discrimination task (ADT). In the VST the stimulus–response mappings were variable, so that none of the stimuli of this task systematically predicted a certain response. In Experiment 1, the stimuli and responses of the VST were either both repeated or both changed in consecutive trials. In Experiment 2, we removed the stimulus repetitions in the VST and only the responses repeated across trials. In Experiment 3, we changed the ADT into a visual–auditory matching task (VAMT) with variable stimulus–response mappings, so that in both tasks only the responses repeated across trials. In Experiments 1 and 2, we observed better performance for FR than for PR, while this difference disappeared in Experiment 3. Together, the results suggest that the stimulus of one task is sufficient to retrieve the entire episode from the previous trial. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-08-10 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10192196/ /pubmed/35948687 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01713-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Pelzer, Lasse
Naefgen, Christoph
Gaschler, Robert
Haider, Hilde
Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
title Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
title_full Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
title_fullStr Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
title_full_unstemmed Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
title_short Element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
title_sort element-level features in conjoint episodes in dual-tasking
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10192196/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35948687
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01713-8
work_keys_str_mv AT pelzerlasse elementlevelfeaturesinconjointepisodesindualtasking
AT naefgenchristoph elementlevelfeaturesinconjointepisodesindualtasking
AT gaschlerrobert elementlevelfeaturesinconjointepisodesindualtasking
AT haiderhilde elementlevelfeaturesinconjointepisodesindualtasking