Effect of Task Modality on Dual-Task Performance, Response Time, and Ratings of Operator Workload

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to use established measures of attentional reserve capacity to test for the existence of tactile-specific resources in the context of Wickens ' (1984, 2002) Multiple Resource Theory. Participants performed a primary counting task in the tactile modality and were presented with a concurrent secondary attention task in the visual, auditory, and tactile modalities. The data indicate a significant difference in performance based on whether the dual-task conditions were performed crossmodally or unimodally, in terms of percent correct and response time to target stimuli. Specifically, participants performed significantly worse in tactile-tactile dual-task conditions, suggesting performance was degraded as a function of resource depletion. Furthermore, participants rated the unimodal dual-task conditions as significantly harder, using a subjective workload rating, than either of the dual-task crossmodal conditions, or the single task condition. The results suggest that task interference was a function of resource limitation rather than structural interference, providing direct empirical evidence supporting the inclusion of tactile resources in Wickens' Multiple Resource Theory.

Patterns of information segregation during working memory and attention revealed by dual-task interference in behavior, pupillometry, and EEG

“…For instance, auditory and visual discrimination thresholds (for pitch and contrast, respectively) are unaffected by concurrent, irrelevant stimuli in the opposite modality, but are considerably higher in the presence of concurrent stimuli in the same modality (Alais et al, 2006). In dual-task paradigms, increased interference has been observed when both tasks are tactile, auditory, or visual, as compared to conditions in which the tasks were presented in different modalities (Morrison et al, 2015;Scerra & Brill, 2012). These results lend support to multiple resource theory, which states that interference between two tasks depends on whether they compete for the same set of limited neural resources.…”

“…Concurrent tasks can also interfere with one another if they require processing information from the same sensory modality. In dual-task paradigms, increased interference has been observed when both tasks are auditory, visual, or tactile compared to conditions in which the tasks operate on inputs from different sensory modalities (Morrison et al, 2015;Scerra & Brill, 2012).…”

Crossmodal matching

“…[In the tables, '-' denotes missing information; 'alternating stimuli' = whether matches between stimuli in two different modalities were performed in both directions; 'feedback type' = whether and what type of information was presented to participants regarding their match values; 'input mechanism' = the type of control that was used to vary intensity of the matching stimulus; 'repeated matches' = the number of times the same match was repeated; 'type of judgment' = how the cues were compared to one-another (absolute or relative); 'participants' = if participants that performed the matching task were the same as those in the actual experiment.] Brill et al, 2007Brill et al, 2008Brill et al, 2009Garcia et al, 2009Scerra & Brill, 2012Shaw, 2006Terrence et al, 2005 Tables 1 and 2 highlight the lack of an agreed-upon crossmodal matching technique and raise questions about the validity and reliability of the various approaches. For example, given the potential for large intra-individual variability of crossmodal matches (Teghtsoonian & Teghtsoonian, 1983), it may not be sufficient to obtain a single match value from a participant for any given modality pair.…”

Tactile Situation Awareness System (TSAS) as a Compensatory Aid for Sensory Loss

“…There are multiple advantages of tactile communication, including omnipresence, omnidirectionality, covertness, effectiveness under degraded visual conditions, effectiveness in acoustically noisy environments, and the ability to be used by persons with the most common forms of sensory disability (e.g., impaired vision, impaired hearing) (Brill, in press). Tactile displays can also benefit attentional processing, particularly if the presentation of additional visual or auditory information would overload an information channel (Lu, Wickens, Sarter, & Sebock, 2011;Scerra & Brill, 2012;Wickens, 2008).…”