Identifying the locus of compatibility-based backward crosstalk: Evidence from an extended PRP paradigm.

2018 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Janczyk ◽  
Sandra Renas ◽  
Moritz Durst
Keyword(s):  
Backward Crosstalk ◽  
Prp Paradigm

Locus of Backward Crosstalk Effects on Task 1 in a Psychological Refractory Period Task

2014 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yao-Ting Ko ◽  
Jeff Miller
Keyword(s):  
Dual Task ◽  
Refractory Period ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Response Selection ◽  
Stimulus Onset ◽  
Standard Response ◽  
Backward Crosstalk ◽  
Selection Stage ◽  
Prp Paradigm ◽  
Response Selection Bottleneck

Our performance on a task decreases when the task is in a dual-task situation than when it is in isolation. An important experimental setting for dual-task situation is the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm, and the dual-task performance decrements in the PRP paradigm are referred to as PRP interference. The standard response-selection bottleneck (RSB) models state that the response-selection stage of the second task (T2) cannot start until the response-selection stage of the first task (T1) finishes, resulting in the PRP interference. Contrary to the prediction of RSB models, several researchers have found T2’s modulations on T1’s performance, and have suggested that T1’s selection-related processes are affected by T2’s selection-related processes, referred to as backward crosstalk effects. The locus of backward crosstalk effects is not clear, however, because RTs were measured in most previous studies. By using semantically unrelated stimuli and responses and by measuring T1’s lateralized readiness potential, we examined the locus of backward crosstalk effects. We found that the interval between T1’s stimulus onset and the stimulus-locked LRP onset was affected, suggesting T2’s response selection starts before T1’s selection is complete. The present result provided electrophysiological evidence focusing on T1’s changes in favor of the hypothesis of parallel response selection in the PRP paradigm.

scholarly journals Disentangling stimulus and response compatibility as potential sources of backward crosstalk

2020 ◽  
Vol 82 (7) ◽  
pp. 3415-3431
Author(s):  
Tobias Rieger ◽  
Jeff Miller
Keyword(s):  
Compatibility Effect ◽  
Psychological Refractory Period ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
Response Compatibility ◽  
Dual Tasking ◽  
Stimulus Response ◽  
Potential Sources ◽  
Dual Task Paradigm ◽  
Backward Crosstalk ◽  
Mapping Condition

Abstract In two experiments (N= 60 each), we investigated the locus of backward crosstalk effects in dual tasking. Specifically, we embedded the typical flanker task within a dual-task paradigm by assigning stimulus-response (S-R) rules to the flankers. In Experiment 1, participants were instructed to first respond to the center letter and only respond to the flanker if the center was a no-go stimulus (i.e., prioritized processing paradigm). Mapping condition was varied between-subjects to be either matched (i.e., same S-R rule for flankers as for center letters), reversed (i.e., opposite S-R rule for flankers), or neutral (i.e., different letters for flankers with separate S-R rules). The results indicated that the backward crosstalk effect was mainly driven by a stimulus-based compatibility, as indicated by a significant S2−R1 compatibility effect in the matched and reversed conditions, with little change in this effect between the matched and reversed conditions. Experiment 2 replicated and extended these findings to a psychological refractory period paradigm. The present findings suggest that in the matched and reversed conditions, there was only one S-R rule active at a time.

Does dorsal processing require central capacity? More evidence from the PRP paradigm

2010 ◽  
Vol 203 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Janczyk ◽  
Wilfried Kunde
Keyword(s):  
Prp Paradigm

The Backward Crosstalk Effect Does Not Depend on the Degree of a Preceding Response Conflict

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (5) ◽  
pp. 277-291
Author(s):  
Carolin Schonard ◽  
Rolf Ulrich ◽  
Markus Janczyk
Keyword(s):  
Subjective Experience ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Response Conflict ◽  
Previous Trial ◽  
Performance Decrement ◽  
Episodic Retrieval ◽  
Dual Tasking ◽  
Sequential Modulation ◽  
Common Observation ◽  
Backward Crosstalk

Abstract. A common observation in dual tasking is a performance decrement in one or both tasks compared with single tasking. Besides, more specific interference occurs depending on certain characteristics of the two tasks. In particular, even Task 1 performance is often improved when responses in both tasks are compatible (e.g., both require left responses) compared to when they are incompatible: the compatibility-based backward crosstalk effect (BCE). Similar to what is observed for conflict tasks, the BCE is sequentially modulated: It is larger following compatible than following incompatible trials. Previous work has attributed this observation to adaptation effects triggered by response conflict arising during incompatible trials. In two experiments, we assessed sequential modulations following trials with different degrees of such a response conflict. In contrast to our expectations, a clear and sizeable sequential modulation was observed even under conditions where no BCE, and thus no empirical sign of an objective response conflict, was present in the previous trial. Therefore, our results show sequential modulations even without prior response conflict, which is not the (sole) trigger of sequential modulations accordingly. We discuss these results with regard to other potential triggers such as the subjective experience of conflict or difficulty, episodic retrieval, and repetitions of response combinations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document