Literature DB >> 23892230

Timing in multitasking: memory contamination and time pressure bias.

Jungaa Moon1, John R Anderson.   

Abstract

There can be systematic biases in time estimation when it is performed in complex multitasking situations. In this paper we focus on the mechanisms that cause participants to tend to respond too quickly and underestimate a target interval (250-400 ms) in a complex, real-time task. We hypothesized that two factors are responsible for the too-early bias: (1) Memory contamination from an even shorter time interval in the task, and (2) time pressure to take appropriate actions in time. In a simpler experiment that was focused on just these two factors, we found a strong too-early bias when participants estimated the target interval in alternation with a shorter interval and when they had little time to perform the task. The too-early bias was absent when they estimated the target interval in isolation without contamination and time pressure. A strong too-late bias occurred when the target interval alternated with a longer interval and there was no time pressure to respond. The effects were captured by incorporating the timing model of Taatgen and van Rijn (2011) into the ACT-R model for the Space Fortress task (Bothell, 2010). The results show that to properly understand time estimation in a dynamic task one needs to model the multiple influences that are occurring from the surrounding context.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive model; Memory; Multitasking; Time estimation; Time pressure

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23892230     DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.06.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Psychol        ISSN: 0010-0285            Impact factor:   3.468


  6 in total

1.  Sleep-dependent consolidation benefits fast transfer of time interval training.

Authors:  Lihan Chen; Lu Guo; Ming Bao
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  End effects and cross-dimensional interference in identification of time and length: Evidence for a common memory mechanism.

Authors:  Jung Aa Moon; Jon M Fincham; Shawn Betts; John R Anderson
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.282

3.  Attention Does Not Affect the Speed of Subjective Time, but Whether Temporal Information Guides Performance: A Large-Scale Study of Intrinsically Motivated Timers in a Real-Time Strategy Game.

Authors:  Robbert van der Mijn; Hedderik van Rijn
Journal:  Cogn Sci       Date:  2021-03

4.  Strategic predictors of performance in a divided attention task.

Authors:  Róbert Adrian Rill; Kinga Bettina Faragó; András Lőrincz
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Cognitive States Matter: Design Guidelines for Driving Situation Awareness in Smart Vehicles.

Authors:  Daehee Park; Wan Chul Yoon; Uichin Lee
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-24       Impact factor: 3.576

Review 6.  A conceptual model of barriers and facilitators to primary clinical teams requesting pediatric palliative care consultation based upon a narrative review.

Authors:  Jennifer K Walter; Douglas L Hill; Concetta DiDomenico; Shefali Parikh; Chris Feudtner
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2019-12-21       Impact factor: 3.234

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.