Dividing attention between the hands and the head: Performance trade-offs between rapid finger tapping and verbal memory.

Abstract

whether this task combination would reveal a specialized resource responsible for coordinating motor outputs when at least one of those outputs involves speech. A second, related purpose was to demonstrate the importance of manipulating task priority when attempting to determine the resource requirements of a task.The rationale underlying our approach and its methodology derives from the multiple resources model of Navon and Gopher (1979), which builds on earlier constructs about divided attention (Norman & Bobrow, 1976). The general idea is that there are different types of processing resources. Two tasks can compete for the same type of resource without showing any performance decrement, relative to when they are performed in isolation, until the aggregate demand exceeds the available supply. After this point, there should be interference on one or both tasks. However, performance decrements can ensue from causes unrelated to competition for the same scarce resource (e.g., concurrence costs in Navon & Gopher's, 1979, terminology; scheduling conflicts in Norman & Shallice 's, 1985). Consequently, just demonstrating that two tasks interfere with each other is insufficient evidence from which to conclude that the tasks demand a common resource. To draw this conclusion, performance trade-offs have to be observed when task priority is manipulated. In particular, when two tasks demand the same type of resource, shifting attention from one to the other should cause an increase in performance on the emphasized task at the expense of performance on the other task. When two tasks have nonoverlapping demands, performance should not trade off. Therefore, failing to ma-This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Resource scarcity and outcome conflict in time-sharing performance

“…For example, Hirst and Kalmar (1987) used time-sharing to refer to rapid switching between the processing oftwo tasks. In contrast, time-sharing in the present paper is used along the tradition followed by Gopher (1993), Friedman, Polson, andDafoe (1988), Moray (1967), andWickens (1990). Here, time-sharing refers to the simultaneous processing of two or more tasks.…”

Cervicobrachial muscle response to cognitive load in a dual-task scenario

“…They assumed that if word reading required storage in short-term memory, the phonological processing center would be activated. Friedman et al (1988) postulated that hemisphere-specific competition for cognitive processing resources would exist in the use of the left hemisphere for both verbal processing and contralateral motor control. Due to this competition, it is possible that the hemisphere specialization has an influence on muscle activity.…”

Summer Research Program - 1996 Graduate Student Research Program. Volume 7B, Armstrong Laboratory

“…It has been suggested that the cerebral hemispheres represent two structurally defined resources (Friedman & Poison, 1981;Friedman, Poison, & Dafoe, 1988;Kinsbourne & Cook, 1971;Wickens, 1980;Wickens, Mountford, & Schreiner, 1981). According to these hypotheses, dual-task decrements in performance may sometimes reflect intrahemispheric competition for information processing resources (Friedman & Poison, 1981;Friedman, Poison, & Dafoe, 1988;Kinsbourne & Cook, 1971).…”

“…It is has been suggested that dual-task decrements in performance (a decrease in ability from single-to multiple-task situations) are the result of competition between tasks for particular resources (Friedman, Poison, & Dafoe, 1988;Kinsbourne & Hicks, 1978;Navon & Gopher, 1979;Wickens, 1980Wickens, , 1984Wickens, , 1991Wickens, , 1992, with resources being defined variously in terms of processing stages, codes of processing, input modality (See Wickens, 1991Wickens, , 1992, as well as in structure (Friedman & Poison, 1981;Friedman, Poison & Dafoe, 1988;Kinsbourne & Hicks, 1978;Kinsbourne & Hiscock, 1983). Generally, to the extent that two concurrently performed tasks compete for the same resources, decreases in performance will be predicted to occur (See Fracker & Wickens, 1989;Lane, 1982 for more detailed discussions of resource theory).…”