Literature DB >> 16718510

Is the psychological refractory period effect for ideomotor compatible tasks eliminated by speed-stress instructions?

Yun Kyoung Shin1, Yang Seok Cho, Mei-Ching Lien, Robert W Proctor.   

Abstract

It has been argued that the psychological refractory period (PRP) effect is eliminated with two ideomotor compatible tasks when instructions stress fast and simultaneous responding. Three experiments were conducted to test this hypothesis. In all experiments, Task 1 required spatially compatible manual responses (left or right) to the direction of an arrow, and Task 2 required saying the name of the auditory letter A or B. In Experiments 1 and 3, the manual responses were keypresses made with the left and right hands, whereas in Experiment 2 they were left-right toggle-switch movements made with the dominant hand. Instructions that stressed response speed reduced reaction time and increased error rate compared to standard instructions to respond fast and accurately, but did not eliminate the PRP effect on Task 2 reaction time. These results imply that, even when response speed is emphasized, ideomotor compatible tasks do not bypass response selection.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16718510     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-006-0066-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  22 in total

1.  Why practice reduces dual-task interference.

Authors:  E Ruthruff; J C Johnston; M Van Selst
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 3.332

2.  A comparison of two response time models applied to perceptual matching.

Authors:  T Van Zandt; H Colonius; R W Proctor
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2000-06

Review 3.  A central capacity sharing model of dual-task performance.

Authors:  Michael Tombu; Pierre Jolicoeur
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Vanishing dual-task interference after practice: has the bottleneck been eliminated or is it merely latent?

Authors:  Eric Ruthruff; James C Johnston; Mark Van Selst; Shelly Whitsell; Roger Remington
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 5.  Stimulus-response compatibility and psychological refractory period effects: implications for response selection.

Authors:  Mei-Ching Lien; Robert W Proctor
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

6.  A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time.

Authors:  Roger Ratcliff; Philip L Smith
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 8.934

7.  A reminder about procedures needed to reliably produce perfect timesharing: comment on Lien, McCann, Ruthruff, and Proctor (2005).

Authors:  Anthony G Greenwald
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.332

8.  Can practice eliminate the psychological refractory period effect?

Authors:  M Van Selst; E Ruthruff; J C Johnston
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Dual-task interference and the cerebral hemispheres.

Authors:  H Pashler; S O'Brien
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 3.332

Review 10.  A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanisms.

Authors:  D E Meyer; D E Kieras
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  2 in total

1.  Investigation on the improvement and transfer of dual-task coordination skills.

Authors:  Tilo Strobach; Peter A Frensch; Alexander Soutschek; Torsten Schubert
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-09-27

2.  On the importance of Task 1 and error performance measures in PRP dual-task studies.

Authors:  Tilo Strobach; Anja Schütz; Torsten Schubert
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-04-07
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.