The dual-stage two-phase (DSTP) model is introduced as a formal and general model of selective attention that includes both an early and a late stage of stimulus selection. Whereas at the early stage information is selected by perceptual filters whose selectivity is relatively limited, at the late stage stimuli are selected more efficiently on a categorical basis. Consequently, selectivity is first low but then abruptly increases during the course of stimulus processing. Although intended as a general model of selective attention, in the present study the DSTP model was applied to account for the distributional data of 3 flanker task experiments. The fit of the model to the data was not only rather good but also superior to those of alternative single-stage models with a continuously increasing selectivity. All together, the model provides a comprehensive account of how early and late stages of attention interact in the control of performance.

No abstract

The goal of the present study was to investigate the costs and benefits of different degrees of strategic parallel processing between two tasks. In a series of experiments with the dual-task flanker paradigm, participants were either instructed to process the tasks serially or in parallel, or--in a control condition--they received no specific instruction. Results showed that the participants were able to adjust the degree of parallel processing as instructed in a flexible manner. Parallel processing of the two tasks repeatedly led to large costs in performance and to high crosstalk effects compared to more serial processing. In spite of the costs, a moderate degree of parallel processing was preferred in the condition with no specific instruction. This pattern of results was observed if the same task set was used for the two tasks, but also if different ones were applied. Furthermore, a modified version of the central capacity sharing (CCS) model (Tombu and Jolicoeur in J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 29:3-18, 2003) was proposed that accounts also for crosstalk effects in dual tasks. The modified CCS model was then evaluated by fitting it successfully to the present data.

In this study, the authors used a dual-task flanker paradigm to investigate the degree to which flankers are coprocessed with the target as a function of whether flankers have to be used as stimuli for a second task. A series of experiments, in which performance in dual tasks was compared with that in single tasks, revealed that participants had a strong tendency to coprocess flankers to a large degree in dual tasks, even if this impaired performance. Coprocessing of flankers was reduced only when totally irrelevant flankers were presented at the beginning of a trial or single tasks were performed on the great majority of trials within a block. The results suggest that it was demanding to process targets and flankers serially when both had to be used for a dual task. As a consequence, target and flankers were processed in parallel, even if this was nonoptimal for target selection.

Recent studies indicate that dual tasks can be performed with a serial or parallel strategy and that the parallel strategy is preferred even if this implies performance costs. The present study investigates the hypothesis that parallel processing is favored because it requires less mental effort compared to serial processing. A serial or parallel processing strategy was induced in a sample of 28 healthy participants. As measures of mental effort, we used a rating as well as heart rate (HR) and electrodermal activity. Parallel processing again showed performance costs relative to serial, whereas serial processing was judged as more effortful. Also tonic HR and phasic HR deceleration were increased with a serial strategy. Thus the preference for a parallel strategy in dual tasks likely reflects a compromise between optimizing performance and minimizing the amount of mental effort. This aspect is neglected in current dual task accounts so far.

No abstract

Choice reaction times are shorter when stimulus and response locations are compatible than when they are incompatible as in the Simon effect. Recent studies revealed that Simon effects are strongly attenuated when there is temporal overlap with a different high-priority task, accompanied by a decrease of early location-related response priming as reflected in the lateralized readiness potential (LRP). The latter result was obtained in a study excluding overlap of stimulus location with any other dimension in the tasks. Independent evidence suggests that location-related priming might be present in conditions with dimensional overlap. Here we tested this prediction in a dual-task experiment supplemented with recording LRPs. The secondary task was either a standard Simon task where irrelevant stimulus location overlapped with dimensions of the primary task or a Stroop-like Simon task including additional overlap of irrelevant and relevant stimulus attributes. At high temporal overlap, there was no Simon effect nor was there stimulus-related response priming in either condition. Therefore stimulus-triggered response priming seems to be abolished in conditions of limited capacity even if the likelihood of an S-R compatibility effect is maximized.

No abstract