Transfer of task-probability-induced biases in parallel dual-task processing occurs in similar, but is constraint in distinct task sets.

IF 2.2 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY
Inga Lück, Victor Mittelstädt, Ian G Mackenzie, Rico Fischer
{"title":"Transfer of task-probability-induced biases in parallel dual-task processing occurs in similar, but is constraint in distinct task sets.","authors":"Inga Lück, Victor Mittelstädt, Ian G Mackenzie, Rico Fischer","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although humans often multitask, little is known about how the processing of concurrent tasks is managed. The present study investigated whether adjustments in parallel processing during multitasking are local (task-specific) or global (task-unspecific). In three experiments, participants performed one of three tasks: a primary task or, if this task did not require a response, one of two background tasks (i.e., prioritized processing paradigm). To manipulate the degree of parallel processing, we presented blocks consisting mainly of primary or background task trials. In Experiment 1, the frequency manipulation was distributed equally across the two background tasks. In Experiments 2 and 3, only one background task was frequency-biased (inducer task). The other background task was presented equally often in all blocks (diagnostic task) and served to test whether processing adjustments transferred. In all experiments, blocks with frequent background tasks yielded stronger interference between primary and background tasks (primary task performance) and improved background task performance. Thus, resource sharing appeared to increase with high background task probabilities even under triple task requirements. Importantly, these adjustments generalized across the background tasks when they were conceptually and visually similar (Experiment 2). Implementing more distinct background tasks limited the transfer: Adjustments were restricted to the inducer task in background task performance and only small transfer was observed in primary task performance (Experiment 3). Overall, the results indicate that the transfer of adjustments in parallel processing is unrestricted for similar, but limited for distinct tasks, suggesting that task similarity affects the generality of resource allocation in multitasking. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001259","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although humans often multitask, little is known about how the processing of concurrent tasks is managed. The present study investigated whether adjustments in parallel processing during multitasking are local (task-specific) or global (task-unspecific). In three experiments, participants performed one of three tasks: a primary task or, if this task did not require a response, one of two background tasks (i.e., prioritized processing paradigm). To manipulate the degree of parallel processing, we presented blocks consisting mainly of primary or background task trials. In Experiment 1, the frequency manipulation was distributed equally across the two background tasks. In Experiments 2 and 3, only one background task was frequency-biased (inducer task). The other background task was presented equally often in all blocks (diagnostic task) and served to test whether processing adjustments transferred. In all experiments, blocks with frequent background tasks yielded stronger interference between primary and background tasks (primary task performance) and improved background task performance. Thus, resource sharing appeared to increase with high background task probabilities even under triple task requirements. Importantly, these adjustments generalized across the background tasks when they were conceptually and visually similar (Experiment 2). Implementing more distinct background tasks limited the transfer: Adjustments were restricted to the inducer task in background task performance and only small transfer was observed in primary task performance (Experiment 3). Overall, the results indicate that the transfer of adjustments in parallel processing is unrestricted for similar, but limited for distinct tasks, suggesting that task similarity affects the generality of resource allocation in multitasking. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

在平行双任务处理过程中,由任务可能性引起的偏差转移发生在相似的任务集中,但在不同的任务集中却受到限制。
尽管人类经常同时处理多项任务,但人们对如何处理并行任务却知之甚少。本研究调查了多任务处理过程中并行处理的调整是局部的(特定任务)还是全局的(非特定任务)。在三项实验中,受试者执行了三项任务中的一项:一项主要任务,或者,如果该任务不需要反应,则执行两项背景任务中的一项(即优先处理范式)。为了操纵并行处理的程度,我们呈现了主要由主要任务或背景任务试验组成的区块。在实验 1 中,频率操纵在两个背景任务中平均分配。在实验 2 和 3 中,只有一项背景任务(诱导任务)是频率偏置的。另一项背景任务在所有区块中出现的频率相同(诊断任务),用于测试加工调整是否会转移。在所有实验中,背景任务出现频率高的区块在主要任务和背景任务(主要任务表现)之间产生了更强的干扰,而背景任务表现则有所改善。因此,即使在三重任务要求下,资源共享似乎也会随着背景任务的高概率而增加。重要的是,当背景任务在概念上和视觉上相似时,这些调整在背景任务中也会普遍存在(实验 2)。实施更独特的背景任务则限制了这种转移:在背景任务的表现中,调整仅限于诱导任务,而在主要任务的表现中仅观察到少量迁移(实验 3)。总之,实验结果表明,并行处理中的调整转移在相似任务中不受限制,但在不同任务中受到限制,这表明任务的相似性会影响多任务中资源分配的普遍性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信