» Articles » PMID: 26878090

Eliminating Dual-task Costs by Minimizing Crosstalk Between Tasks: The Role of Modality and Feature Pairings

Overview
Journal Cognition
Publisher Elsevier
Specialty Psychology
Date 2016 Feb 16
PMID 26878090
Citations 21
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We tested the independent influences of two content-based factors on dual-task costs, and on the parallel processing ability: The pairing of S-R modalities and the pairing of relevant features between stimuli and responses of two tasks. The two pairing factors were realized across four dual-task groups. Within each group the two tasks comprised two different stimulus modalities (visual and auditory), two different relevant stimulus features (spatial and verbal) and two response modalities (manual and vocal). Pairings of S-R modalities (standard: visual-manual and auditory-vocal, non-standard: visual-vocal and auditory-manual) and feature pairings (standard: spatial-manual and verbal-vocal, non-standard: spatial-vocal and verbal-manual) varied across groups. All participants practiced their respective dual-task combination in a paradigm with simultaneous stimulus onset before being transferred to a psychological refractory period paradigm varying stimulus-onset asynchrony. A comparison at the end of practice revealed similar dual-task costs and similar pairing effects in both paradigms. Dual-task costs depended on modality and feature pairings. Groups training with non-standard feature pairings (i.e., verbal stimulus features mapped to spatially separated response keys, or spatial stimulus features mapped to verbal responses) and non-standard modality pairings (i.e., auditory stimulus mapped to manual response, or visual stimulus mapped to vocal responses) had higher dual-task costs than respective standard pairings. In contrast, irrespective of modality pairing dual-task costs virtually disappeared with standard feature pairings after practice in both paradigms. The results can be explained by crosstalk between feature-binding processes for the two tasks. Crosstalk was present for non-standard but absent for standard feature pairings. Therefore, standard feature pairings enabled parallel processing at the end of practice.

Citing Articles

Multi-tasking costs in triple-task performance despite dual-task preparation.

Stefani M, Sauter M, Mack W Mem Cognit. 2025; .

PMID: 39875715 DOI: 10.3758/s13421-024-01674-w.


Multitasking Practice Eliminates Modality-Based Interference by Separating Task Representations in Sensory Brain Regions.

Mueckstein M, Gorgen K, Heinzel S, Granacher U, Rapp M, Stelzel C J Neurosci. 2024; 45(4.

PMID: 39510835 PMC: 11756619. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0755-24.2024.


Dual-task costs in speed tasks: a comparison between elite ice hockey, open-skill and closed-skill sports athletes.

Brinkbaumer M, Kupper C, Reichert L, Zentgraf K Front Psychol. 2024; 15:1357312.

PMID: 39077212 PMC: 11284104. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1357312.


When more is less: Adding action effects to reduce crosstalk between concurrently performed tasks.

Schacherer J, Hazeltine E Cognition. 2022; 230:105318.

PMID: 36356393 PMC: 9762415. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2022.105318.


Effects of different dual task training on dual task walking and responding brain activation in older adults with mild cognitive impairment.

Kuo H, Yeh N, Yang Y, Hsu W, Liao Y, Wang R Sci Rep. 2022; 12(1):8490.

PMID: 35589771 PMC: 9120469. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-11489-x.