z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Learning of across- and within-task contingencies modulates partial-repetition costs in dual-tasking
Author(s) -
Lasse Pelzer,
Christoph Naefgen,
Robert Gaschler,
Hilde Haider
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
psychological research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.117
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1430-2772
pISSN - 0340-0727
DOI - 10.1007/s00426-021-01518-1
Subject(s) - stimulus (psychology) , task (project management) , cognitive psychology , human multitasking , set (abstract data type) , psychology , computer science , speech recognition , management , economics , programming language
Dual-task costs might result from confusions on the task-set level as both tasks are not represented as distinct task-sets, but rather being integrated into a single task-set. This suggests that events in the two tasks are stored and retrieved together as an integrated memory episode. In a series of three experiments, we tested for such integrated task processing and whether it can be modulated by regularities between the stimuli of the two tasks (across-task contingencies) or by sequential regularities within one of the tasks (within-task contingencies). Building on the experimental approach of feature binding in action control, we tested whether the participants in a dual-tasking experiment will show partial-repetition costs: they should be slower when only the stimulus in one of the two tasks is repeated from Trial n - 1 to Trial n than when the stimuli in both tasks repeat. In all three experiments, the participants processed a visual-manual and an auditory-vocal tone-discrimination task which were always presented concurrently. In Experiment 1, we show that retrieval of Trial n - 1 episodes is stable across practice if the stimulus material is drawn randomly. Across-task contingencies (Experiment 2) and sequential regularities within a task (Experiment 3) can compete with n - 1-based retrieval leading to a reduction of partial-repetition costs with practice. Overall the results suggest that participants do not separate the processing of the two tasks, yet, within-task contingencies might reduce integrated task processing.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here