The neural effect of stimulus-response modality compatibility on dual-task performance: an fMRI study

Recent fMRI studies suggest that the inferior frontal sulcus (IFS) is involved in the coordination of interfering processes in dual-task situations. The present study aims to further specify this assumption by investigating whether the compatibility between stimulus and response modalities modulates dual-task-related activity along the IFS. It has been shown behaviorally that the degree of interference, as measured by dual-task costs, increases in modality-incompatible conditions (e.g. visual–vocal tasks combined with auditory–manual tasks) as compared to modality-compatible conditions (e.g. visual–manual tasks combined with auditory–vocal tasks). Using fMRI, we measured IFS activity when participants performed modality-compatible and modality-incompatible single and dual tasks. Behaviorally, we replicated the finding of higher dual-task costs for modality-incompatible tasks compared to modality-compatible tasks. The fMRI data revealed higher activity along the IFS in modality-incompatible dual tasks compared with modality-compatible dual tasks when inter-individual variability in functional brain organization is taken into account. We argue that in addition to temporal order coordination (Szameitat et al., 2002), the IFS is involved in the coordination of cognitive processes associated with the concurrent mapping of sensory information onto corresponding motor responses in dual-task situations.     

Neuroimaging studies of working memory:

We performed meta-analyses on 60 neuroimaging (PET and fMRI) studies of working memory (WM), considering three types of storage material (spatial, verbal, and object), three types of executive function (continuous updating of WM, memory for temporal order, and manipulation of information in WM), and interactions between material and executive function. Analyses of material type showed the expected dorsal-ventral dissociation between spatial and nonspatial storage in the posterior cortex, but not in the frontal cortex. Some support was found for left frontal dominance in verbal WM, but only for tasks with low executive demand. Executive demand increased right lateralization in the frontal cortex for spatial WM. Tasks requiring executive processing generally produce more dorsal frontal activations than do storage-only tasks, but not all executive processes show this pattern. Brodmann’s areas (BAs) 6, 8, and 9, in the superior frontal cortex, respond most when WM must be continuously updated and when memory for temporal order must be maintained. Right BAs 10 and 47, in the ventral frontal cortex, respond more frequently with demand for manipulation (including dual-task requirements or mental operations). BA 7, in the posterior parietal cortex, is involved in all types of executive function. Finally, we consider a potential fourth executive function: selective attention to features of a stimulus to be stored in WM, which leads to increased probability of activating the medial prefrontal cortex (BA 32) in storage tasks.     

The dual-task practice advantage: Empirical evidence and cognitive mechanisms

Practice of two simultaneous component tasks in dual-task situations leads to an improvement in dual-task performance. The present paper reviews empirical evidence for this practice-related improvement and discusses its underlying cognitive mechanisms. In particular, the robustness of the phenomenon of dual-task practice advantage (DTPA) is evaluated. This phenomenon is described as an advantage in dual-task performance at the end of dual-task practice (i.e., simultaneous task practice) in comparison to the dual-task performance after single-task practice (i.e., separate task practice). The review investigates the existence of empirical evidence of the DTPA phenomenon and specifications of its mechanisms in the context of the allocation and scheduling hypothesis and the integration hypothesis. Evidence for the existence of the DTPA phenomenon and the allocation and scheduling hypothesis was demonstrated in dual tasks with (1) combinations of two sensorimotor tasks, (2) combinations of one continuous task and one sensorimotor task, (3) combinations of two working-memory tasks, and (4) combinations of one motor task and one cognitive task. In contrast, the findings demonstrate that the DTPA phenomenon in dual tasks with (5) combinations of two long-term memory retrieval tasks can instead be explained by the integration hypothesis. The relevance of these findings is discussed in relation to real-world problems.

     

Investigation on the improvement and transfer of dual-task coordination skills

Recent research has demonstrated that dual-task performance in situations with two simultaneously presented tasks can be substantially improved with extensive practice. This improvement was related to the acquisition of task coordination skills. Earlier studies provided evidence that these skills result from hybrid practice, including dual and single tasks, but not from single-task practice. It is an open question, however, whether task coordination skills are independent from the specific practice situation and are transferable to new situations or whether they are non-transferable and task-specific. The present study, therefore, tested skill transfer in (1) a dual-task situation with identical tasks in practice and transfer, (2) a dual-task situation with two tasks changed from practice to transfer, and (3) a task switching situation with two sequentially presented tasks. Our findings are largely consistent with the assumption that task coordination skills are non-transferable and task-specific. We cannot, however, definitively reject the assumption of transferable skills when measuring error rates in the dual-task situation with two changed tasks after practice. In the task switching situation, single-task and hybrid practice both led to a transfer effect on mixing costs.     

Selective impairment of masked priming in dual-task performance

This study investigated the impact of divided attention on masked priming. In a dual-task setting, two tasks had to be carried out in close temporal succession: a tone discrimination task and a masked priming task. The order of the tasks was varied between experiments, and attention was always allocated to the first task—that is, the first task was prioritized. The priming task was the second (nonprioritized) task in Experiment 1 and the first (prioritized) task in Experiment 2. In both experiments, “novel” prime stimuli associated with semantic processing were essentially ineffective. However, there was intact priming by another type of prime stimuli associated with response priming. Experiment 3 showed that all these prime stimuli can reveal significant priming effects during a task-switching paradigm in which both tasks were performed consecutively. We conclude that dual-task specific interference processes (e.g., the simultaneous coordination of multiple stimulus–response rules) selectively impair priming that is assumed to rely on semantic processing.     

Dissociating controlled from automatic processing in temporal preparation

The aim of the present study was to investigate the controlled versus the automatic nature of temporal preparation. If temporal preparation involves controlled rather than automatic processing, it should be reduced by the addition of a concurrent demanding task. This hypothesis was tested by comparing participants' performance in a temporal preparation task that measured two main effects of temporal preparation (temporal orienting and sequential effects) between a single-task and a dual-task condition. In the single-task condition, participants responded to a visual target presented after symbolic cues that were highly predictive of the moment of target onset. In the dual-task condition, the temporal preparation task was performed concurrently with a working memory task. The results showed that sequential effects survived to dual-task interference, while temporal orienting was reduced as a function of the competition for executive resources required by both working memory and temporal preparation tasks. These findings provide direct behavioural evidence that temporal orienting and sequential effects involve dissociable cognitive processes.     

Age- and practice-related influences on dual-task costs and compensation mechanisms under optimal conditions of dual-task performance

Impaired dual-task performance in younger and older adults can be improved with practice. Optimal conditions even allow for a (near) elimination of this impairment in younger adults. However, practice effects under these conditions in older adults are unknown. Further, it is open, how changed task scheduling and/ or the acquisition of task coordination skills affect the temporal overlap of two tasks in different age groups; this overlap indicate the involvement of these practice-related mechanisms to compensate for impaired dual-task performance. In a dual-task situation of Schumacher et al. (2001 , Psychological Science, 12, 230) including optimal conditions for dual-task performance, both younger and older adults were able to achieve an improvement in dual-task performance with 8 practice sessions to the same degree. The temporal task overlap changed similarly in both age groups during these sessions demonstrating a similar degree of the involvement of compensation mechanisms in younger and older adults. At the end of practice, however, we showed that older adults do not achieve the same optimized dual-task performance level of younger adults.     

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.     

Timing and executive function: Bidirectional interference between concurrent temporal production and randomization tasks

A review of interference effects in concurrent temporal/nontemporal dual-task studies suggests that prospective timing may be related to executive cognitive functions. Executive processes play a supervisory role in behavior by controlling attention, coordinating information, and scheduling actions. In the present research, a timing task was paired with an established executive task in a dual-task paradigm. The timing task required subjects t o generate a series o f 5-sec temporal productions,and the executive task was random number generation. These tasks were performed both separately and concurrently. Comparisons of single-task and dual-task conditions showed that (1) the randomization task interfered with timing by making temporal productions more variable and longer and (2) concurrent timing disrupted randomization performance by making responses less random. This pattern of bidirectional interference supports the idea that timing relies on the same attentional resources used by other executive-level tasks.     

Concurrent performance of two memory tasks: evidence for domain-specific working memory systems

Previous studies of dual-task coordination in working memory have shown a lack of dual-task interference when a verbal memory task is combined with concurrent perceptuomotor tracking. Two experiments are reported in which participants were required to perform pairwise combinations of (1) a verbal memory task, a visual memory task, and perceptuomotor tracking (Experiment 1), and (2) pairwise combinations of the two memory tasks and articulatory suppression (Experiment 2). Tracking resulted in no disruption of the verbal memory preload over and above the impact of a delay in recall and showed only minimal disruption of the retention of the visual memory load. Performing an ongoing verbal memory task had virtually no impact on retention of a visual memory preload or vice versa, indicating that performing two demanding memory tasks results in little mutual interference. Experiment 2 also showed minimal disruption when the two memory tasks were combined, although verbal memory (but not visual memory) was clearly disrupted by articulatory suppression interpolated between presentation and recall. These data suggest that a multiple-component working memory model provides a better account for performance in concurrent immediate memory tasks than do theories that assume a single processing and storage system or a limited-capacity attentional system coupled with activated memory traces.     

Coordination dynamics and attentional costs of continuous and discontinuous bimanual circle drawing movements

It has been suggested that the temporal control of rhythmic unimanual movements is different between tasks requiring continuous (e.g., circle drawing) and discontinuous movements (e.g., finger tapping). Specifically, for continuous movements temporal regularities are an emergent property, whereas for tasks that involve discontinuities timing is an explicit part of the action goal. The present experiment further investigated the control of continuous and discontinuous movements by comparing the coordination dynamics and attentional demands of bimanual continuous circle drawing with bimanual intermittent circle drawing. The intermittent task required participants to insert a 400ms pause between each cycle while circling. Using dual-task methodology, 15 right-handed participants performed the two circle drawing tasks, while vocally responding to randomly presented auditory probes. The circle drawing tasks were performed in symmetrical and asymmetrical coordination modes and at movement frequencies of 1Hz and 1.7Hz. Intermittent circle drawing exhibited superior spatial and temporal accuracy and stability than continuous circle drawing supporting the hypothesis that the two tasks have different underlying control processes. In terms of attentional cost, probe RT was significantly slower during the intermittent circle drawing task than the continuous circle drawing task across both coordination modes and movement frequencies. Of interest was the finding that in the intermittent circling task reaction time (RT) to probes presented during the pause between cycles did not differ from the RT to probes occurring during the circling movement. The differences in attentional demands between the intermittent and continuous circle drawing tasks may reflect the operation of explicit event timing and implicit emergent timing processes, respectively.     

Cognitive demands of error processing

This study used a dual-task methodology to assess attention demands associated with error processing during an anticipation-timing task. A difference was predicted in attention demands during feedback on trials with correct responses and errors. This was addressed by requiring participants to respond to a probe reaction-time stimulus after augmented feedback presentation. 16 participants (8 men, 8 women) completed two phases, the reaction time task only and the anticipation-timing task with the probe RT task. False feedback indicating error and a financial reward manipulation were used to increase relevance of errors. Data supported the hypothesis that error processing is associated with higher cognitive demands than processing feedback denoting a correct response. Individuals responded with quicker probe reaction times during presentation of feedback on correct trials than on error trials. These results are discussed with respect to the cognitive processes which might occur during error processing and their role in motor learning.     

Processing two tasks with varying task order: central stage duration influences central processing order

In a recent study, Sigman and Dehaene (2006, PLoS Biology, 4, 1227–1238) reported that perceptual processing duration influences processing order of two tasks in the psychological refractory period paradigm (PRP). The present study examines whether the duration of central processes also influences processing order. For this purpose, we employed letter tasks with different central processing durations and varied task order in the PRP. In one part of the experiment, a tone discrimination task was combined with a similar time-consuming letter discrimination task. In the other part, the tone task was combined with a more time-consuming letter task, which required a mental rotation of the letter thereby prolonging central processing. If the duration of central processes influences processing order, participants should perform the tone task first more often when it is presented with the more time-consuming mental rotation task, than when it is presented with the similar time-consuming letter task. The results clearly confirm this prediction and thus show that not only perceptual processing duration but also central processing duration affects processing order in a dual-task situation. We suggest that the reported effect mirrors a tendency of participants to minimize total reaction time to both tasks by reducing slack time.     

Developmental fractionation of working memory and response inhibition during childhood

The lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) plays a major role in both working memory (WM) and response inhibition (RI), which are fundamental for various cognitive abilities. We explored the relationship between these LPFC functions during childhood development by examining the performance of two groups of children in visuospatial and auditory WM tasks and a go/no-go RI task. In the younger children (59 5- and 6-year-olds), performance on the visuospatial WM task correlated significantly with that in the auditory WM task. Furthermore, accuracy in these tasks correlated significantly with performance on the RI task, particularly in the no-go trials. In contrast, there were no significant correlations among those tasks in older children (92 8- and 9-year-olds). These results suggest that functional neural systems for visuospatial WM, auditory WM, and RI, especially those in the LPFC, become fractionated during childhood, thereby enabling more efficient processing of these critical cognitive functions.     

Interference effects of stimulus–response modality pairings in dual tasks and their robustness

Recent evidence suggests that the degree of interference in dual-task situations depends crucially on the pairings of input- and output modalities of the two component tasks with increased dual-task costs for modality incompatible (i.e., visual–vocal and auditory–manual) compared to modality compatible (i.e., visual–manual and auditory–vocal) dual tasks. These effects of modality pairings in dual tasks have been related to the overlap of non-preferred processing pathways in modality incompatible tasks. Until now, modality compatibility has not yet been related to other sources of interference in a dual-task context, such as stimulus–response (S–R) compatibility or crosstalk. In the present study, we conducted two experiments using the paradigm of the psychological refractory period (PRP) to test the effects of S–R compatibility and crosstalk on the effects of modality compatibility in temporally overlapping task situations. Experiment 1 revealed an overadditive interaction between stimulus onset asynchrony and modality compatibility for tasks with S–R compatible mappings, indicating that modality compatibility effects are present in different task situations, even when S–R mappings are otherwise compatible. In Experiment 2, we aimed at pinpointing the boundaries of the effects of modality compatibility in dual-task situations. We showed that additional sources of dual-task interference in a modality compatible dual task could overwrite the pronounced PRP effect previously shown for modality incompatible tasks. Taken together, these data provide new evidence that the specific types of stimulus–response modality pairings are an additional factor that might interact with other sources of interference in dual-task situations.     

Processing order in dual-task situations: The “first-come,first-served” principle and the impact of task order instructions

When two overlapping tasks are processed, they hit a bottleneck at a central processing stage that prevents simultaneous processing of the two tasks. Thus far, however, the factors determining the processing order of the tasks at the bottleneck are unknown. The present study was designed to (re)investigate whether the arrival times of the two tasks at the central bottleneck are a key determinant of the processing order (cf. Sigman & Dehaene, 2006). To this end, we implemented a visual–auditory dual task with a random stimulus order, in which we manipulated arrival time by prolonging the initial, perceptual processing stage (stimulus analysis) of the visual task and compared the effects of this manipulation with those of one impacting the central bottleneck stage of the visual task. Additionally, we implemented two instruction conditions: Participants were told to respond either in the order of stimulus presentation or in the order they preferred. The manipulation of the visual perception stage led to an increase in task response reversals (i.e., the response order was different from the order of stimulus presentation), whereas there was no such increase when the bottleneck stage was manipulated. This pattern provides conclusive evidence that the processing order at the bottleneck is (at least in part) determined by the arrival times of the tasks at that point. Reaction time differences between the two instruction conditions indicated that additional control processes are engaged in determining task processing order when the participants are expressly told to respond in the order of stimulus presentation.     

Differences in numeric,verbal, and spatial reasoning between engineering and literature students through a neurocognitive lens

This study used electroencephalography to investigate the brain activations of college students of various disciplines when they responded to questions in numeric, verbal, and spatial reasoning tasks. In total, 15 engineering students and 15 literature students were recruited in this experiment and were asked to respond to 12 intelligence test questions. The results were as follows: (i) the participants’ brain activations increased in the frontoparietal network during the numeric reasoning task, and the spectral power in the right anterior temporal cortex was generally higher in the literature students than in the engineering students. (ii) Activations of the language network were observed during the verbal reasoning task, and the spectral power in the right-biased posterior frontal cortex was generally higher in the literature students than in the engineering students; by contrast, the spectral power in the left lateral frontal cortex was generally higher in the engineering students than in the literature students. (iii) The participants’ brain activations increased in the spatial processing network during the spatial reasoning task, and the spectral power in the right posterior temporal cortex was generally higher in the literature students than in the engineering students.     

Supertaskers: Profiles in extraordinary multitasking ability

Theory suggests that driving should be impaired for any motorist who is concurrently talking on a cell phone. But is everybody impaired by this dual-task combination? We tested 200 participants in a high-fidelity driving simulator in both single- and dual-task conditions. The dual task involved driving while performing a demanding auditory version of the operation span (OSPAN) task. Whereas the vast majority of participants showed significant performance decrements in dual-task conditions (compared with single-task conditions for either driving or OSPAN tasks), 2.5% of the sample showed absolutely no performance decrements with respect to performing single and dual tasks. In single-task conditions, these “supertaskers” scored in the top quartile on all dependent measures associated with driving and OSPAN tasks, and Monte Carlo simulations indicated that the frequency of supertaskers was significantly greater than chance. These individual differences help to sharpen our theoretical understanding of attention and cognitive control in naturalistic settings.     

节律性时间期待效应不受注意控制的影响

采用双任务范式探讨当听觉节律刺激序列以较慢速度呈现时,其诱导产生的时间期待效应是否受到同时进行的视觉工作记忆任务的影响。结果发现,无论目标刺激是呈现在听觉通道还是视觉通道,双任务和单任务条件下目标刺激出现在规律听觉刺激序列之后被试的反应时均快于目标出现在非规律听觉刺激序列之后,即节律性刺激序列诱导产生的时间期待效应不受工作记忆任务的影响。该结果表明节律性时间期待效应不受注意控制的影响。     

Practice-related reduction of dual-task costs under conditions of a manual-pedal response combination

Severe dual-task costs emerge when two tasks are performed at the same time. Schumacher, Seymour, Glass, Kieras, and Meyer (2001) showed a complete reduction of dual-task costs after extensive dual-task practice with a visual-manual (VM) task and an auditory-verbal (AV) task. First, we replicated these findings and found task conditions sufficient to achieve a high level of dual-task cost reduction (Experiment 1). Using these conditions, we tested whether the Schumacher et al. findings generalise to a different dual-task situation, in which participants practised a VM task and an auditory-pedal (AP) task (VM-AP) conjointly (Experiment 2). In the VM-AP task situation we found reduced dual-task costs after practice. Dual-task costs, however, remained on a high level after eight sessions of practice and also when extending practice to 12 sessions. No single participant showed evidence for time sharing in the VM-AP dual task. These results suggest that the finding of complete dual-task cost reduction does not generalise to the VM-AP task combination used in the present study. We discuss different factors potentially relevant for the observation of persisting dual-task costs over practice in the VM-AP task.