Task Switching, Modality Compatibility, and the Supra-Modal Function of Eye Movements
Abstract
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.
References
(1994). A theory of visual stability across saccadic eye movements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 247–292.
(1972). On doing two things at once: Time sharing as a function of ideomotor compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 94, 52–57.
(2006). The role of input and response modality pairings in dual-task performance: Evidence for content-dependent central interference. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 291–345.
(1978). Divided attention. Human Nature, 1, 54–61.
(2011). The role of saccades during multitasking: Towards a response-related view of eye movements. Psychological Research, 75, 452–465.
(2011). Oculomotor interference during manual response preparation: Evidence from the response cueing paradigm. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 73, 702–707.
(2011). Crossmodal action: Modality matters. Psychological Research, 75, 445–451.
(2009). Dual-task crosstalk between saccades and manual responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35, 352–362.
(2010a). Crossmodal action selection: Evidence from dual-task compatibility. Memory & Cognition, 38, 493–501.
(2010b). Fixation disengagement enhances peripheral perceptual processing: Evidence for a perceptual gap effect. Experimental Brain Research, 201, 631–640.
(2008). Cognitive control of saccadic eye movements. Brain and Cognition, 68, 327–340.
(2009). Saccade control after V1 lesion revisited. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 19, 608–614.
(2010). Control and interference in task switching – a review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849–874.
(2010). Cross-modal selective attention in task-switching. Psychological Research, 74, 255–267.
(2008). Trans-saccadic perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 466–473.
(1997a). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms. Psychological Review, 104, 3–65.
(1997b). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 2. Accounts of psychological refractory-period phenomena. Psychological Review, 104, 749–791.
(1989). Reflexive and voluntary orienting of visual attention: Time course of activation and resistance to interruption. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 315–330.
(2007). Using eye movements to probe development and dysfunction. In , Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 100–124). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
(1987). Role of outcome conflict in dual-task interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 13, 435–448.
(1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: Data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 220–244.
(1998). The psychology of attention. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
(2005). Switching of response modalities. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 1325–1338.
(2010). The integration of task-set components into cognitive task representations. Psychologica Belgica, 50, 383–411.
(1980). Attention and the detection of signals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 160–174.
(1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.
(2006). What causes residual dual-task interference after practice? Psychological Research, 70, 494–503.
(2007). Prediction of external events with our motor system: Towards a new framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11, 211–218.
(2003). Auditory what, where, and when: A somatotopy in lateral premotor cortex. NeuroImage, 20, 173–185.
(2001). Virtually perfect time sharing in dual-task performance: Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck. Psychological Science, 12, 101–108.
(1976). Skills of divided attention. Cognition, 4, 215–230.
(2010). Central cross-talk in task switching: Evidence from manipulating input-output modality compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1075–1081.
(2011). The role of input-output modality compatibility in task-switching. Psychological Research, 75, 491–498.
(2007). fMRI studies of eye movement control: Investigating the interaction of cognitive and sensorimotor brain systems. NeuroImage, 36, 54–60.
(2010). Task switching: Interplay of reconfiguration and interference. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 601–626.
(1984). Processing resources in attention. In , Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102). New York, NY: Academic Press.
(2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Factors, 50, 449–455.
(2002). The latency of saccades toward auditory targets in humans. In , Progress in Brain Research (Vol. 140, pp. 51–59). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier.
