Semantic interference in picture naming during dual-task performance does not vary with reading ability

Previous dual-task studies examining the locus of semantic interference of distractor words in picture naming have obtained diverging results. In these studies, participants manually responded to tones and named pictures while ignoring distractor words (picture–word interference, PWI) with varying stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between tone and PWI stimulus. Whereas some studies observed no semantic interference at short SOAs, other studies observed effects of similar magnitude at short and long SOAs. The absence of semantic interference in some studies may perhaps be due to better reading skill of participants in these than in the other studies. According to such a reading-ability account, participants’ reading skill should be predictive of the magnitude of their interference effect at short SOAs. To test this account, we conducted a dual-task study with tone discrimination and PWI tasks and measured participants’ reading ability. The semantic interference effect was of similar magnitude at both short and long SOAs. Participants’ reading ability was predictive of their naming speed but not of their semantic interference effect, contrary to the reading ability account. We conclude that the magnitude of semantic interference in picture naming during dual-task performance does not depend on reading skill.     

Task choice and semantic interference in picture naming

Evidence from dual-task performance indicates that speakers prefer not to select simultaneous responses in picture naming and another unrelated task, suggesting a response selection bottleneck in naming. In particular, when participants respond to tones with a manual response and name pictures with superimposed semantically related or unrelated distractor words, semantic interference in naming tends to be constant across stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) between the tone stimulus and the picture–word stimulus. In the present study, we examine whether semantic interference in picture naming depends on SOA in case of a task choice (naming the picture vs reading the word of a picture–word stimulus) based on tones. This situation requires concurrent processing of the tone stimulus and the picture–word stimulus, but not a manual response to the tones. On each trial, participants either named a picture or read aloud a word depending on the pitch of a tone, which was presented simultaneously with picture–word onset or 350 ms or 1000 ms before picture–word onset. Semantic interference was present with tone pre-exposure, but absent when tone and picture-word stimulus were presented simultaneously. Against the background of the available studies, these results support an account according to which speakers tend to avoid concurrent response selection, but can engage in other types of concurrent processing, such as task choices.     

Capacity demands of phoneme selection in word production: new evidence from dual-task experiments

Three dual-task experiments investigated the capacity demands of phoneme selection in picture naming. On each trial, participants named a target picture (Task 1) and carried out a tone discrimination task (Task 2). To vary the time required for phoneme selection, the authors combined the targets with phonologically related or unrelated distractor pictures (Experiment 1) or words, which were clearly visible (Experiment 2) or masked (Experiment 3). When pictures or masked words were presented, the tone discrimination and picture naming latencies were shorter in the related condition than in the unrelated condition, which indicates that phoneme selection requires central processing capacity. However, when the distractor words were clearly visible, the facilitatory effect was confined to the picture naming latencies. This pattern arose because the visible related distractor words facilitated phoneme selection but slowed down speech monitoring processes that had to be completed before the response to the tone could be selected.     

The role of executive functions in human prospective interval timing

Human timing is thought to be based on the output of an internal clock. Whilst the functioning of this clock is well documented, it is unclear which other cognitive resources may moderate timing. Brown (2006) and Rattat (2010) suggest that the central executive of working memory may be recruited during timing. However it seems likely that the fractionated executive component processes identified by Miyake et al. (2000) and Fisk and Sharp (2004) may differentially contribute to timing performance; further exploration of this was the aim of the present study. An interference paradigm was employed in which participants completed an interval production task, and tasks which have been shown to tap the four key executive component processes (shifting, inhibition, updating and access) under single and dual-task conditions. Comparison of single and dual-task performance indicated that timing always became more variable when concurrently performing a second task. Bidirectional interference only occurred between the interval production task and the memory updating task, implying that both tasks are competing for the same executive resource of updating. There was no evidence in the current study to suggest that switching, inhibition or access was involved in timing, however they may be recruited under more difficult task conditions.     

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.     

Dual-task decrements in driving performance: The impact of task type,working memory,and the frequency of task performance

Driving while carrying out another (secondary) task interferes with performance, though the degree of interference may vary between tasks and individual drivers. In this study, we focused on two potentially interrelated individual difference variables that may play a role in determining dual-task interference: working memory capacity and the driver’s experience with the relevant secondary task. We used a driving simulator to measure interference, comparing single-task performance (driving alone) with driving performance during three secondary tasks: conversing on a handsfree cellphone, texting, and selecting a song on a touchscreen Mp3 player. Drivers also rated the difficulty of driving while carrying out each secondary task. For the individual difference variables, working memory was measured using the Operation Span test (OSPAN), and experience was assessed in terms of self-reported daily driving exposure and exposure to the relevant secondary tasks (frequency, duration). Overall, we found evidence of dual-task interference, though interference varied between tasks; the texting and Mp3 tasks produced significantly more interference than handsfree cellphone conversation. For the texting and Mp3 song selection tasks, interference was apparent in terms of increased steering variability, but for the Mp3 task there was also compensatory slowing, with drivers slowing down while carrying out the task. OSPAN performance and daily driving exposure were both covariates in predicting the amount of dual-task interference. However, our results suggest that in all but two cases, both involving the texting task, the effects of the OSPAN and the driving and secondary task exposure variables were independent rather than interrelated.     

Domain-general contributions to social reasoning: theory of mind and deontic reasoning re-explored

Using older adults and dual-task interference, we examined performance on two social reasoning tasks: theory of mind (ToM) tasks and versions of the deontic selection task involving social contracts and hazardous conditions. In line with performance accounts of social reasoning, evidence from both aging and the dual-task method suggested that domain-general resources contribute to performance of these tasks. Specifically, older adults were impaired relative to younger adults on all types of social reasoning tasks tested; performance varied as a function of the demands these tasks placed on domain-general resources. Moreover, in younger adults, simultaneous performance of a working memory task interfered with younger adults' performance on both types of social reasoning tasks; here too, the magnitude of the interference effect varied with the processing demands of each task. Limits placed on social reasoning by executive functions contribute a great deal to performance, even in old age and in healthy younger adults under conditions of divided attention. The role of potentially non-modular and modular contributions to social reasoning is discussed.     

Cued shifts of attention and memory encoding in partial report: A dual-task approach

This study explores how cued shifts of visual attention and rapid encoding of visual information relate to limited-capacity processing mechanisms. Three experiments were conducted placing a partial-report task within a dual-task paradigm. Experiments 1 and 2 involved a simple speeded visual discrimination (Task 1) and then an unspeeded partial-report task (Task 2). Generally, Task 2 accuracy declined as the temporal overlap between the two tasks increased. In addition, in Experiment 1, varying the number of items in the partial-report display had an effect on performance regardless of overlap. In contrast, in Experiment 2, varying the type of probe had an effect only at long task overlap. The generality of the interference effect was tested in Experiment 3 using an auditory discrimination as Task 1. Again, Task 2 accuracy declined as the temporal overlap between the two tasks increased. In all cases, the observed interference had the properties of a processing bottleneck. It is argued that encoding information into memory and response selection for the first task both require general-purpose processing. The results are discussed in terms of the functional relationship between attention and memory.     

Dual-task automatization: The key role of sensory–motor modality compatibility

How do people automatize their dual-task performance through bottleneck bypassing (i.e., accomplish parallel processing of the central stages of two tasks)? In the present work we addressed this question, evaluating the impact of sensory–motor modality compatibility—the similarity in modality between the stimulus and the consequences of the response. We hypothesized that incompatible sensory–motor modalities (e.g., visual–vocal) create conflicts within modality-specific working memory subsystems, and therefore predicted that tasks producing such conflicts would be performed less automatically after practice. To probe for automaticity, we used a transfer psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure: Participants were first trained on a visual task (Exp. 1) or an auditory task (Exp. 2) by itself, which was later presented as Task 2, along with an unpracticed Task 1. The Task 1–Task 2 sensory–motor modality pairings were either compatible (visual–manual and auditory–vocal) or incompatible (visual–vocal and auditory–manual). In both experiments we found converging indicators of bottleneck bypassing (small dual-task interference and a high rate of response reversals) for compatible sensory–motor modalities, but indicators of bottlenecking (large dual-task interference and few response reversals) for incompatible sensory–motor modalities. Relatedly, the proportion of individuals able to bypass the bottleneck was high for compatible modalities but very low for incompatible modalities. We propose that dual-task automatization is within reach when the tasks rely on codes that do not compete within a working memory subsystem.

     

挫折情境下自我肯定对执行功能的影响

为探讨挫折情境下自我肯定对执行功能的影响,创设挫折和非挫折情境,采用价值观自我肯定干预,通过Stroop范式和2-back范式分别测量抑制控制和工作记忆的刷新能力。结果发现,挫折情境下的Stroop任务和2-back任务反应时均高于非挫折情境;挫折情境下自我肯定组在Stroop任务和2-back任务上的反应时均显著低于非自我肯定组,而非挫折情境下两组的反应时没有显著性差异;Stroop效应量在情境与肯定条件上的交互作用不显著。结果表明挫折降低了执行功能的任务表现,自我肯定干预能够改善挫折情境下执行功能相关的任务成绩,促进了个体对工作记忆任务的刷新能力和Stroop任务的认知表现,但对抑制控制能力的改善没有明显作用。     

How does practice reduce dual-task interference: Integration, automatization, or just stage-shortening?

The present study assessed three hypotheses of how practice reduces dual-task interference: Practice teaches participants to efficiently integrate performance of a task pair; practice promotes automatization of individual tasks, allowing the central bottleneck to be bypassed; practice leaves the bottleneck intact but shorter in duration. These hypotheses were tested in two transfer-of-training experiments. Participants received one of three training types (Task 1 only, or Task 2 only, or dual-task), followed by dual-task test sessions. Practice effects in Experiment 1 (Task 1: auditory-vocal; Task 2: visual-manual) were fully explained by the intact bottleneck hypothesis, without task integration or automatization. This hypothesis also accounted well for the majority of participants when the task order was reversed (Experiment 2). In this case, however, there were multiple indicators that several participants had succeeded in eliminating the bottleneck by automatizing one or both tasks. Neither experiment provided any evidence that practice promotes efficient task integration.     

Working memory and mental arithmetic: A case for dual central executive resources

The current study was designed to examine the possible existence of two limited-capacity pools of central executive resources: one each for verbal and visuospatial processing. Ninety-one college students (M age = 19.0, SD = 2.2) were administered a verbal working memory task that involved updating numbers in 2-, 3-, and 4-load conditions. The task was administered in both single task (no-interference condition) and dual-task (verbal interference and visuospatial interference conditions) formats. Findings indicated main effects for both memory load and type of interference, as well as, a load × interference interaction. Verbal interference led to a steeper increase in errors on the primary verbal working memory task; whereas, there was a smaller increase in errors across load in both the non-verbal and no-interference conditions. The effect of verbal interference and the lack of a spatial interference effect on a primary task that utilized verbal working memory resources, suggests that the processing of verbal and spatial stimuli in a dual-task paradigm requires separate central executive resources.     

Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice

The authors tested the hypothesis that with adequate practice, people can execute 2 cognitive operations in working memory simultaneously. In Experiment 1, 6 students practiced updating 2 items in working memory through 2 sequences of operations (1 numerical, 1 spatial). In different blocks, imperative stimuli for the 2 sequences of operations were presented either simultaneously or sequentially. Initially, most participants experienced substantial dual-task costs. After 24 sessions of practice, operation latencies for simultaneous presentation were equal to the maximum of times for the 2 operations in the sequential condition, suggesting perfect timesharing. Experiment 2 showed that a reduction of dual-task costs requires practice on the combination of the 2 updating tasks, not just practice on each individual task. Hence, the reduction of dual-task costs cannot be explained by shortening or automatization of individual operations.     

Consolidation of multifeature items in visual working memory: Central capacity requirements for visual consolidation

In the present study, we examined whether greater attentional resources are required for consolidating two features (e.g., color and orientation) than for consolidating one feature (e.g., color) in visual working memory (WM). We used a dual-task procedure: Subjects performed a WM task and a secondary probe task, sometimes concurrently. In the WM task, subjects decided whether two displays (containing one to four objects composed of one or two features) were the same or different. In the probe task, subjects made a speeded discrimination response to a tone. Performance in both tasks was impaired when they were performed concurrently; however, performance costs in the tone task were not greater for multi- than for single-feature conditions (when the orientation and conjunction conditions were considered). Results suggested that equivalent attentional resources were necessary for consolidation of single-orientation or multifeature items.     

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.     

Training and transfer effects of long-term memory retrieval training

ABSTRACT

Long-term memory retrieval ability and working memory can share attention control ability. Based on cognitive plasticity, a hypothesis that cognitive training could improve long-term memory retrieval efficiency and that this could transfer to retrieval involving working memory was proposed. 60 undergraduates were randomly assigned to a group of training and an active control group; all the participants completed the same tasks in the same order before and after the training, the tasks included a long-term memory retrieval access task, a intelligence test, a switching task, a working memory updating task, a response inhibition task and an interference control task. The statistics results indicate that cognitive training can improve long-term memory retrieval efficiency and has a transfer effect on working memory updating, interference control and switching ability, but not on response inhibition or intelligence. This reveal the plasticity of long-term memory retrieval and its influence on working memory.     

Remarks of the In-Coming Editor

A digit memory task and a delayed visual aiming task were used in a test of resource capacity theories. These tasks were run either singly, with short- or long-retention intervals, or in pairs. In the dual-task conditions, the short version of one was inserted into the longer version of the other. Delay by itself had no effect on retention, but the dual-task combinations showed asymmetrical interference: Inserting verbal memory into the visual-motor delay had little effect on either task, but inserting the motor task into the verbal retention interval disrupted both. These results thus support neither single nor multiple resource models, but can be explained with reference to component processes in working memory.     

Sustained attention in language production: An individual differences investigation

Whereas it has long been assumed that most linguistic processes underlying language production happen automatically, accumulating evidence suggests that these processes do require some form of attention. Here we investigated the contribution of sustained attention: the ability to maintain alertness over time. In Experiment 1, participants’ sustained attention ability was measured using auditory and visual continuous performance tasks. Subsequently, employing a dual-task procedure, participants described pictures using simple noun phrases and performed an arrow-discrimination task while their vocal and manual response times (RTs) and the durations of their gazes to the pictures were measured. Earlier research has demonstrated that gaze duration reflects language planning processes up to and including phonological encoding. The speakers’ sustained attention ability correlated with the magnitude of the tail of the vocal RT distribution, reflecting the proportion of very slow responses, but not with individual differences in gaze duration. This suggests that sustained attention was most important after phonological encoding. Experiment 2 showed that the involvement of sustained attention was significantly stronger in a dual-task situation (picture naming and arrow discrimination) than in simple naming. Thus, individual differences in maintaining attention on the production processes become especially apparent when a simultaneous second task also requires attentional resources.     

Attentional resource demands of visual word recognition in naming and lexical decisions.

Attentional demands of lexical access were assessed with dual-task methodology. Subjects performed an auditory probe task alone (single-task) or combined (dual-task) with either a lexical decision or a naming task. In Experiment 1, probe performance showed a decrement from single- to dual-task conditions during recognition of words in both lexical decision and naming tasks. In addition, decrements in probe performance were larger during processing of low-frequency compared with high-frequency words in both of the word recognition tasks. Experiment 2 showed that the time course of frequency-sensitive demands was similar across lexical decision and naming tasks and that attention is required early in the word recognition sequence. The results support the assumption that lexical access is both frequency sensitive and attention demanding.     

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.