scholarly journals Crossmodal Effects in Task Switching: Modality Compatibility with Vocal and Pedal Responses

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Nadine Stephan ◽  
Johanna Josten ◽  
Erik Friedgen ◽  
Iring Koch
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Modality Compatibility

Task Switching, Modality Compatibility, and the Supra-Modal Function of Eye Movements

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Nadine Stephan ◽  
Iring Koch ◽  
Jessica Hendler ◽  
Lynn Huestegge
Keyword(s):  
Eye Movements ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Modality Compatibility

The role of input–output modality compatibility in task switching

2011 ◽  
Vol 75 (6) ◽  
pp. 491-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Nadine Stephan ◽  
Iring Koch
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Input Output ◽  
Modality Compatibility

The interplay of crossmodal attentional preparation and modality compatibility in cued task switching

2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 955-965 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edina Fintor ◽  
Denise N Stephan ◽  
Iring Koch
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Compatibility Effect ◽  
Stimulus Modality ◽  
Stimulus Interval ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Response Stimulus Interval ◽  
Response Stimulus ◽  
Modality Compatibility ◽  
Active Preparation

Two experiments examined the influence of preparation on modality compatibility effects in task switching. The term modality compatibility refers to the similarity between the stimulus modality and the modality of response-related sensory consequences. Previous research showed evidence for modality compatibility benefits in task switching when participants switched either between two modality compatible tasks (auditory-vocal and visual-manual) or between two modality incompatible tasks (auditory-manual and visual-vocal). In this study, we investigated the influence of active preparation on modality compatibility effects in task switching. To this end, in Experiment 1, we introduced unimodal modality cues, whereas in Experiment 2, bimodal abstract cues were used. In both experiments, the cue-stimulus interval (CSI) was manipulated while holding the response-stimulus interval (RSI) constant. In both experiments, we found not only decreased switch costs with long CSI but also the elimination of the residual switch costs. More importantly, this preparation effect did not modulate the modality compatibility effect in task switching. To account for this data pattern, we assume that cue-based preparation of switches by modality mappings was highly effective and produced no residual reaction time (RT) costs with long CSI.

Task Switching, Modality Compatibility, and the Supra-Modal Function of Eye Movements

2013 ◽  
Vol 60 (2) ◽  
pp. 90-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Nadine Stephan ◽  
Iring Koch ◽  
Jessica Hendler ◽  
Lynn Huestegge
Keyword(s):  
Task Switching ◽  
Cross Talk ◽  
Compatibility Effect ◽  
Visual Orientation ◽  
Manual Response ◽  
Central Processing ◽  
Response Modality ◽  
Manual Responses ◽  
Oculomotor Responses ◽  
Modality Compatibility

Previous research suggested that specific pairings of stimulus and response modalities (visual-manual and auditory-vocal tasks) lead to better dual-task performance than other pairings (visual-vocal and auditory-manual tasks). In the present task-switching study, we further examined this modality compatibility effect and investigated the role of response modality by additionally studying oculomotor responses as an alternative to manual responses. Interestingly, the switch cost pattern revealed a much stronger modality compatibility effect for groups in which vocal and manual responses were combined as compared to a group involving vocal and oculomotor responses, where the modality compatibility effect was largely abolished. We suggest that in the vocal-manual response groups the modality compatibility effect is based on cross-talk of central processing codes due to preferred stimulus-response modality processing pathways, whereas the oculomotor response modality may be shielded against cross-talk due to the supra-modal functional importance of visual orientation.

Tactile Stimuli Increase Effects of Modality Compatibility in Task Switching

2015 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 276-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise Nadine Stephan ◽  
Iring Koch
Keyword(s):  
Auditory Stimulus ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Compatibility Effect ◽  
Visual Stimulation ◽  
Auditory Stimulation ◽  
Stimulus Group ◽  
Central Processing ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Tactile Stimuli ◽  
Modality Compatibility

Abstract. Modality compatibility refers to the similarity of stimulus modality and modality of response-related sensory consequences. Previous dual-task studies found increased switch costs for modality incompatible tasks (auditory-manual/visual-vocal) compared to modality compatible tasks (auditory-vocal/visual-manual). The present task-switching study further examined modality compatibility and investigated vibrotactile stimulation as a novel alternative to visual stimulation. Interestingly, a stronger modality compatibility effect on switch costs was revealed for the group with tactile-auditory stimulation compared to the visual-auditory stimulation group. We suggest that the modality compatibility effect is based on crosstalk of central processing codes due to ideomotor “backward” linkages between the anticipated response effects and the stimuli indicating this response. This crosstalk is increased in the tactile-auditory stimulus group compared to the visual-auditory stimulus group due to a higher degree of ideomotor-compatibility in the tactile-manual tasks. Since crosstalk arises between tasks, performance is only affected in task switching and not in single tasks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document