Investigating limits of task prioritization in dual-tasking: evidence from the prioritized processing and the psychological refractory period paradigms

dc.contributor.authorRieger, Tobias
dc.contributor.authorMittelstädt, Victor
dc.contributor.authorDignath, David
dc.contributor.authorKiesel , Andrea
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-28T12:42:35Z
dc.date.available2022-12-28T12:42:35Z
dc.date.issued2019-09-24
dc.description.abstractDual-tasking often requires prioritizing one task over the other. For example, in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm, participants are instructed to initially respond to Task 1 (T1) and only then to Task 2 (T2). Furthermore, in the prioritized processing paradigm (PP), participants are instructed to perform T2 only if T1 was a no-go trial—requiring even more prioritization. The present study investigated the limits of task prioritization. Two experiments compared performance in the PRP paradigm and the PP paradigm. To manipulate task prioritization, tasks were rewarded differently (e.g., high reward for T1, low reward for T2, and vice versa). We hypothesized (a) that performance will improve for the highly rewarded task (Experiments 1 and 2) and (b) that there are stronger reward effects for T1 in the PRP than in the PP paradigm (Experiment 2). Results showed an influence of reward on task prioritization: For T1, high reward (compared to low reward) caused a speed-up of responses that did not differ between the two paradigms. However, for T2, reward influenced response speed selectively in the PP paradigm, but not in the PRP paradigm. Based on paradigm-specific response demands, we propose that the coordination of two motor responses plays a crucial role in prioritizing tasks and might limit the flexibility of the allocation of preparatory capacity.en
dc.description.sponsorshipDFG, 247629600, SPP 1772: Human performance under multiple cognitive task requirements: From basic mechanisms to optimized task scheduling
dc.identifier.eissn1430-2772
dc.identifier.issn0340-0727
dc.identifier.urihttps://depositonce.tu-berlin.de/handle/11303/17897
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-16686
dc.language.isoen
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.subject.ddc150 Psychologiede
dc.subject.otherdual-taskingen
dc.subject.otherPRPen
dc.subject.otherprioritized processingen
dc.subject.otherrewarden
dc.subject.othertask preparationen
dc.subject.otherresponse coordinationen
dc.titleInvestigating limits of task prioritization in dual-tasking: evidence from the prioritized processing and the psychological refractory period paradigmsen
dc.typeArticle
dc.type.versionacceptedVersion
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi10.1007/s00426-019-01250-x
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitlePsychological research
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishernameSpringer Nature
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublisherplaceHeidelberg
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pageend396
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.pagestart384
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume85
dcterms.rightsHolder.referenceVerlagspolicy
dcterms.rightsHolder.urlhttps://web.archive.org/web/20221226023246/https://www.springernature.com/gp/open-research/policies/journal-policies
tub.accessrights.dnbfree
tub.affiliationFak. 5 Verkehrs- und Maschinensysteme::Inst. Psychologie und Arbeitswissenschaft::FG Handlungs- und Automationspsychologie
tub.publisher.universityorinstitutionTechnische Universität Berlin

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading…
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Rieger_etal_Investigating_2019.pdf
Size:
724.57 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
4.23 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:

Collections