No evidence for qualitative differences in the processing of short and long temporal intervals

Several lines of research suggest that two distinct timing mechanisms are involved in temporal information processing: a sensory mechanism for processing of durations in the range of milliseconds and a cognitively controlled mechanism for processing of longer durations. The present study employed a dual-task approach and a sensory interference paradigm to further elucidate the distinct timing hypothesis. Experiment 1 used mental arithmetic as a nontemporal secondary task, Experiment 2 a memory search task, and Experiment 3 a visuospatial memory task. In Experiment 4, a loudness manipulation was applied. Mental arithmetic and loudness manipulation affected temporal discrimination of both brief and long intervals, whereas the two remaining tasks did not influence timing performance. Observed differences in interference patterns may be explained by some tasks being more difficult than others. The overall pattern of results argues against two qualitatively distinct timing mechanisms, but is consistent with attention-based cognitive models of human timing.     

Attentional resources in timing: Interference effects in concurrent temporal and nontemporal working memory tasks

Three experiments examined interference effects in concurrent temporal and nontemporal tasks. The timing task in each experiment required subjects to generate a series of 2- or 5-sec temporal productions. The nontemporal tasks were pursuit rotor tracking (Experiment 1), visual search (Experiment 2), and mental arithmetic (Experiment 3). Each nontemporal task had two levels of difficulty. All tasks were performed under both single- and dual-task conditions. A simple attentional allocation model predicts bidirectional interference between concurrent tasks. The main results showed the classic interference effect in timing. That is, the concurrent nontemporal tasks caused temporal productions to become longer (longer productions represent a shortening of perceived time) and/or more variable than did timing-only conditions. In general, the difficult version of each nontemporal task disrupted timing more than the easier version. The timing data also exhibited a serial lengthening effect, in which temporal productions became longer across trials. Nontemporal task performance showed a mixed pattern. Tracking and visual search were essentially unaffected by the addition of a timing task, whereas mental arithmetic was disrupted by concurrent timing. These results call for a modification of the attentional allocation model to incorporate the idea of specialized processing resources. Two major theoretical frameworks—multiple resource theory and the working memory model—are critically evaluated with respect to the resource demands of timing and temporal/ nontemporal dual-task performance.     

A task-irrelevant stimulus attribute affects perception and short-term memory

Selective attention protects cognition against intrusions of task-irrelevant stimulus attributes. This protective function was tested in coordinated psychophysical and memory experiments. Stimuli were superimposed, horizontally and vertically oriented gratings of varying spatial frequency; only one orientation was task relevant. Experiment 1 demonstrated that a task-irrelevant spatial frequency interfered with visual discrimination of the task-relevant spatial frequency. Experiment 2 adopted a two-item Sternberg task, using stimuli that had been scaled to neutralize interference at the level of vision. Despite being visually neutralized, the task-irrelevant attribute strongly influenced recognition accuracy and associated reaction times (RTs). This effect was sharply tuned, with the task-irrelevant spatial frequency having an impact only when the task-relevant spatial frequencies of the probe and study items were highly similar to one another. Model-based analyses of judgment accuracy and RT distributional properties converged on the point that the irrelevant orientation operates at an early stage in memory processing, not at a later one that supports decision making.     

Is the interference between memory processing and timing specific to the use of verbal material?

Increasing load in a memory task performed simultaneously with a timing task shortens perceived time, an effect that has been observed previously with memory tasks using verbal material. The present experiments examine whether two similar memory tasks, one in which verbal material is used and another one in which nonverbal material is used, would produce similar interference effects on concurrent time reproduction. In Experiment 1, the number of nonverbal stimuli (pseudo‐random dot patterns) was manipulated in a memory task performed while a temporal interval to be reproduced was encoded. Reproductions shortened proportionally to the duration of memory processing executed during time estimation. Verbal stimuli (consonants) were used in Experiment 2 in otherwise identical experimental conditions. Effects observed in Experiment 2 were comparable to those obtained in Experiment 1. Taken together, these results support the notion that interference from memory tasks on concurrent time estimation is not determined by the specific type of material processed in memory, but instead by the duration of memory processing.     

Is the interference between memory processing and timing specific to the use of verbal material?

Increasing load in a memory task performed simultaneously with a timing task shortens perceived time, an effect that has been observed previously with memory tasks using verbal material. The present experiments examine whether two similar memory tasks, one in which verbal material is used and another one in which nonverbal material is used, would produce similar interference effects on concurrent time reproduction. In Experiment 1, the number of nonverbal stimuli (pseudo-random dot patterns) was manipulated in a memory task performed while a temporal interval to be reproduced was encoded. Reproductions shortened proportionally to the duration of memory processing executed during time estimation. Verbal stimuli (consonants) were used in Experiment 2 in otherwise identical experimental conditions. Effects observed in Experiment 2 were comparable to those obtained in Experiment 1. Taken together, these results support the notion that interference from memory tasks on concurrent time estimation is not determined by the specific type of material processed in memory, but instead by the duration of memory processing.     

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.     

The effects of interference and retention delay on temporal generalization performance

This study investigated the effect of forgetting of the standard duration on temporal discrimination in a generalization task. In two experiments, participants were given a temporal generalization task with or without a retention delay between the learning of the standard duration and the testing of the comparison durations. During this delay, they either performed or did not perform an interference task. Results failed to reveal any effect of 15-min and 24-h retention delays on time judgments (Experiment 1). However, when an interference task was performed during the 15-min delay (Experiment 2), there was a subjective shortening effect, indicating that the standard duration was judged shorter with than without an interference task. These findings suggest that when an interference task occurs immediately after initial temporal encoding, it affects the process of consolidation in reference memory.     

Time estimation and concurrent nontemporal processing: Specific interference from short-term-memory demands

Previous studies have shown that the effect of concurrent nontempcraLprocessmg on time astimation may vary depending on the level of difficulty of the nontemporal task. This is commonly interpreted within the context of so-called distraction/interruption models of temporal processing, which propose that as concurrent task difficulty or complexity is increased, temporal processing receives less attention. We hypothesize that the effect of nontemporal processing does not depend on the level of difficulty as such, but rather on the extent to which the concurrent nontemporal task specifically involves processing in short-term meraery. Four experiments were run in which the short-term memory requirements of concurrent tasks were systematically varied, although all of the tasks were of comparable levels of difficulty. In the first experiment, the effect of memory search on simultaneous temporal productions was proportional to the number of items to search. As with reaction time, produced intervals were shown to increase linearly with the number of items in the memorized set. In Experiment 2, a visual search involving some load on short-term memory interfered in the same way with time production, although to a lesser extent. The last two experiments showed that performing attention-demanding visual search tasks that did not involve short-term memory did not lengthen simultaneously produced time inter-vals. This suggests that interference of nontemporal processing on time processing may not be a matter of nonspecific general purpose attentional resources, but rather of concurrent short-term-memory processing demands.     

提取干扰对内隐记忆的影响

以往研究多认同内隐记忆不会受到干扰的影响,但主要集中于编码时的干扰不会影响随后的内隐记忆提取成绩,而对于提取时的干扰是否也不会影响内隐记忆成绩仍存在疑义。该文在实验1采用学习-测验范式,通过在提取阶段设置同时干扰任务进一步考察提取干扰与内隐记忆的关系,结果表明提取干扰下并未发现明显的启动效应,即提取干扰破坏了内隐记忆。为进一步探讨内隐记忆的提取干扰效应是否源于记忆与干扰刺激同时呈现所引起的知觉表征竞争,实验2改变了记忆与干扰刺激的呈现顺序,结果表明不论干扰刺激在记忆项目之前或之后呈现,启动效应均受到影响。相比之下,提取干扰对再认成绩的影响并不明显(实验3)。上述结果表明,内隐记忆的提取干扰效应是源于一般认知资源的竞争,在提取过程中任何能够产生认知资源竞争的变量设置都可能会削减内隐测验中的启动效应。     

Motor limitation in dual-task processing with different effectors

According to the extended bottleneck model, dual-task interference does not arise only from a central bottleneck but also from processing limitations at the motor stage. Evidence for this assumption has previously been found only for same-effector tasks but not for different-effector tasks. In order to examine the existence of motor interference with different effectors, we used the psychological refractory period paradigm and employed response sequences of different length in Task 1 (R1 sequence length). Experiment 1 incorporated vocal response sequences in Task 1 and a manual response in Task 2. In Experiment 2, the assignment of the effectors to the two tasks was reversed. In both experiments, the long R1 sequence prolonged reaction time for Task 2 (RT2), and this effect was reduced with decreasing temporal overlap of the two tasks. Thus, the present experiments demonstrate motor interference between different-effector tasks. This interference may be due to on-line programming or to central response monitoring.     

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.     

Effects of level of processing and rehearsal on frequency judgments

The effects of attention during encoding and rehearsal after initial encoding on frequency estimates were investigated in three experiments. Varying the level of processing affected the linear increase in frequency estimates as a function of actual frequency, but varying processing after encoding with remember or forget cues had the greatest effects on the intercept of the function relating judged to actual frequency. Deeper levels of processing improved performance in a frequency discrimination task, whereas remember and forget cues had only very small effects on performance. Materials that are easy to rehearse were compared with materials that are difficult to rehearse in Experiment 2. The results were interpreted as evidence against a covert rehearsal explanation of slope effects in frequency estimation tasks because materials that are difficult to rehearse tended to produce larger interactions between remember versus forget cues and frequency than materials that are easier to rehearse. In Experiment 3, an arithmetic task that was performed during word encoding affected the slope of the function relating judged to actual frequency, but the same task performed immediately after word presentation had no effect on frequency estimates. It was concluded that frequency is not stored automatically because attention during the initial stages of encoding affects it; however, attention devoted to processing after initial encoding does not affect the rate with which subjective frequency increases with repetitions.     

Spatio-temporal working-memory and short-term object-location tasks use different memory mechanisms

Spatial short-term memory for objects' locations was investigated in a spatial relocation task. During maintenance, dynamic visual noise or spatial tapping were administered as visual or spatial secondary tasks, respectively. Because memory for location should tap the visual component of working memory, a visual but not a spatial secondary task should impair location memory. In fact, neither of the tasks impaired memory (Experiment 1), although the expected dissociation between visual and spatial components was clearly confirmed for a spatio-temporal main task (Corsi test) (Experiment 2). We then contrasted location memory for pictures of objects and of nonsense figures under visual interference. Real objects were relocated much better than nonsense figures, and visual noise was again ineffective (Experiment 3). When spatial tapping was combined with the same material (Experiment 3a), again no influence on memory for locations of objects was observed and only a small influence on remembering nonsense figures. We suggest that the Corsi and the relocation VSWM-tasks use different memory mechanisms. The configuration of objects is reconstructed from perceptual records in an episodic buffer, provided by the same structures that enable visual memory after longer intervals. Rehearsal is not necessary for the persistence of these traces. In contrast, in the Corsi task remembering, a temporal sequence across homogeneous locations needs spatio-temporal marking and therefore active rehearsal of the locations by shifting spatial attention. A spatially demanding secondary task during retention interrupts this rehearsal.     

What happens to an individual visual working memory representation when it is interrupted?

This study tested the hypothesis that even the simplest cognitive tasks require the storage of information in working memory (WM), distorting any information that was previously stored in WM. Experiment 1 tested this hypothesis by requiring observers to perform a simple letter discrimination task while they were holding a single orientation in WM. We predicted that performing the task on the interposed letter stimulus would cause the orientation memory to become less precise and more categorical compared to when the letter was absent or when it was present but could be ignored. This prediction was confirmed. Experiment 2 tested the modality specificity of this effect by replacing the visual letter discrimination task with an auditory pitch discrimination task. Unlike the interposed visual stimulus, the interposed auditory stimulus produced little or no disruption of WM, consistent with the use of modality‐specific representations. Thus, performing a simple visual discrimination task, but not a simple auditory discrimination task, distorts information about a single feature being maintained in visual WM. We suggest that the interposed task eliminates information stored within the focus of attention, leaving behind a WM representation outside the focus of attention that is relatively imprecise and categorical.     

The cognitive loci of the display and task-relevant set size effects on distractor interference: Evidence from a dual-task paradigm

The congruency effect of a task-irrelevant distractor has been found to be modulated by task-relevant set size and display set size. The present study used a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm to examine the cognitive loci of the display set size effect (dilution effect) and the task-relevant set size effect (perceptual load effect) on distractor interference. A tone discrimination task (Task 1), in which a response was made to the pitch of the target tone, was followed by a letter discrimination task (Task 2) in which different types of visual target display were used. In Experiment 1, in which display set size was manipulated to examine the nature of the display set size effect on distractor interference in Task 2, the modulation of the congruency effect by display set size was observed at both short and long stimulus-onset asynchronies (SOAs), indicating that the display set size effect occurred after the target was selected for processing in the focused attention stage. In Experiment 2, in which task-relevant set size was manipulated to examine the nature of the task-relevant set size effect on distractor interference in Task 2, the effects of task-relevant set size increased with SOA, suggesting that the target selection efficiency in the preattentive stage was impaired with increasing task-relevant set size. These results suggest that display set size and task-relevant set size modulate distractor processing in different ways.     

Evidence for parallel semantic memory retrieval in dual tasks

In this dual-task study, we applied both cross-talk logic and locus-of-slack logic to test whether participants can retrieve semantic categories in Task 2 in parallel to Task 1 bottleneck processing. Whereas cross-talk logic can detect parallel memory retrieval only in conditions of categorical overlap between tasks, the locus-of-slack approach is independent of such restrictions. As was expected, using the cross-talk logic, we found clear evidence for parallel retrieval of semantic categories when there was categorical overlap between tasks (Experiment 1). Locus-of-slack-based evidence for parallel semantic retrieval was found, however, both in conditions with (Experiment 1) and in those without (Experiment 2) categorical overlap between tasks. Crucially,however, increasing the demand for resources required to switch from Task 1 to Task 2 eliminated even the locus-of-slack-based evidence for parallel memory retrieval during the psychological refractory period (Experiment 3). Together, our results suggest that parallel retrieval is not bound to conditions of categorical overlap between tasks but, instead, is contingent upon resources needed for switching between tasks (e.g., Oriet, Tombu, & Jolicoeur, 2005).     

Dividing attention within and between hemispheres: testing a multiple resources approach to limited-capacity information processing

Two experiments tested the limiting case of a multiple resources approach to resource allocation in information processing. In this framework, the left and right hemispheres are assumed to have separate, limited-capacity pools of undifferentiated resources that are not mutually accessible, so that tasks can overlap in their demand for these resources either completely, partially, or not at all. We tested all three degrees of overlap in demand for left hemisphere supplies, using dual-task methodology in which subjects were induced to pay different amounts of attention to each task. Experiment 1 compared complete and partial overlap by combining a verbal memory load with a task in which subjects named nonsense syllables briefly presented to either the left or right visual field (LVF and RVF, respectively). Experiment 2 compared complete versus no overlap by using the same verbal memory load combined with a laterally presented same-different judgment task that did not require a spoken response. Decrements from single-task performance were always more severe when the visual field task stimulus was presented to the RVF. Further, subjects in Experiment 1 were able to trade performance between tasks on both LVF and RVF trials because there was always at least some overlap in left hemisphere demand. In Experiment 2, performance trade-offs were observed on RVF (complete overlap) trials, but not on LVF trials, where no overlap in demand existed. These results contradict a single-capacity model, but they support the idea that the hemispheres' resource supplies are independent and have implications for both cerebral specialization and divided attention issues.     

视觉工作记忆负载类型对注意选择的影响

通过操纵Flanker任务相对于视觉工作记忆任务的呈现位置, 探讨在视觉工作记忆编码和保持阶段, 精度负载和容量负载对注意选择的影响。行为结果发现, Flanker任务呈现位置和视觉工作记忆负载类型影响注意选择; ERP结果发现, 在保持阶段, 当搜索目标和干扰项不一致时, 负载类型影响N2成分。研究表明, 在编码阶段, 视觉工作记忆负载主要通过占用更多知觉资源降低干扰效应, 支持知觉负载理论; 而在保持阶段, 当Flanker任务位于记忆项内部时, 两类负载在工作记忆表征过程中不同的神经活动导致投入到注意选择的认知控制资源不同, 可能是两类负载影响保持阶段注意选择的机制。     

The locus of the emotional Stroop effect: A study with the PRP paradigm

Stimuli that are clearly positive or negative (hence valence-laden stimuli) have the potential to interrupt unrelated task processing. A typical example is the emotional Stroop effect (ESE) in which responding to a certain task feature (e.g., color) is delayed by the presentation of task-irrelevant valent stimuli (e.g., negative pictures) compared to valence-neutral stimuli. Here we scrutinize which processes are slowed down by irrelevant but valent stimulation. In Experiment 1, participants performed in a Psychological Refractory Period (PRP) experiment with tone discrimination as Task 1 and color discrimination as Task 2. Importantly, colors in Task 2 were accompanied by valent or neutral pictures. Valent pictures delayed responding in Task 2 (thus an ESE) and this delay was additive to the time interval between tasks. In Experiment 2, task order was reversed and the ESE in Task 1 fully propagated to the Task 2 tone discrimination. These results imply that irrelevant valence-laden stimulation delays capacity-limited processes, and we suggest that this is a late perceptual process acting on stimulus categorization.