Uncorking the central bottleneck: Even novel tasks can be performed automatically.

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1037/xhp0001169
Morgan Lyphout-Spitz, François Maquestiaux, Eric Ruthruff, Steeven Chaloyard
{"title":"Uncorking the central bottleneck: Even novel tasks can be performed automatically.","authors":"Morgan Lyphout-Spitz, François Maquestiaux, Eric Ruthruff, Steeven Chaloyard","doi":"10.1037/xhp0001169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Can people perform two novel tasks in parallel? Available evidence and prevailing theories overwhelmingly indicate that the answer is no, due to stubborn capacity limitations in central stages (e.g., a central bottleneck). Here we propose a new hypothesis, which suggests otherwise: people are capable of fully parallel central processing (i.e., bypassing the central bottleneck), yet often fail to do so, mainly due to preparation neglect. This preparation-neglect hypothesis was evaluated in four dual-task experiments pairing novel tasks (Task 1 and Task 2) using arbitrary stimulus-response mappings. Experiment 1, using a classic psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure, replicated the finding of dozens of previous PRP studies: none of the participants bypassed the bottleneck, instead exhibiting large dual-task interference on Task 2 (445 ms). In Experiment 2, the same dual-task PRP trials were randomly intermixed with single-task trials on Task 2, to boost preparation on that task. Here, nearly half the sample of participants bypassed the central bottleneck, exhibiting small dual-task interference on Task 2 (48 ms). Two additional experiments showed that initial practice does not by itself enable bottleneck bypassing, but boosting preparation of Task 2 (via intermixing single-task trials of Task 2) does. We conclude that, when properly prepared, people are capable of far more dual-task automaticity than was previously believed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50195,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001169","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Can people perform two novel tasks in parallel? Available evidence and prevailing theories overwhelmingly indicate that the answer is no, due to stubborn capacity limitations in central stages (e.g., a central bottleneck). Here we propose a new hypothesis, which suggests otherwise: people are capable of fully parallel central processing (i.e., bypassing the central bottleneck), yet often fail to do so, mainly due to preparation neglect. This preparation-neglect hypothesis was evaluated in four dual-task experiments pairing novel tasks (Task 1 and Task 2) using arbitrary stimulus-response mappings. Experiment 1, using a classic psychological refractory period (PRP) procedure, replicated the finding of dozens of previous PRP studies: none of the participants bypassed the bottleneck, instead exhibiting large dual-task interference on Task 2 (445 ms). In Experiment 2, the same dual-task PRP trials were randomly intermixed with single-task trials on Task 2, to boost preparation on that task. Here, nearly half the sample of participants bypassed the central bottleneck, exhibiting small dual-task interference on Task 2 (48 ms). Two additional experiments showed that initial practice does not by itself enable bottleneck bypassing, but boosting preparation of Task 2 (via intermixing single-task trials of Task 2) does. We conclude that, when properly prepared, people are capable of far more dual-task automaticity than was previously believed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解开中心瓶颈:即使是新颖的任务也能自动执行。
人们能够同时完成两项新任务吗?现有的证据和流行的理论都压倒性地表明,答案是否定的,因为中枢阶段存在顽固的能力限制(如中枢瓶颈)。在这里,我们提出了一个新的假设,它表明事实并非如此:人们有能力进行完全并行的中央处理(即绕过中央瓶颈),但却常常做不到,这主要是由于忽视了准备工作。我们在四项双任务实验中评估了这种准备忽视假说,这些实验将新任务(任务 1 和任务 2)与任意刺激-反应映射配对。实验 1 采用了经典的心理折射期(PRP)程序,重复了之前数十项心理折射期研究的结果:没有一个参与者绕过瓶颈,反而在任务 2 中表现出较大的双任务干扰(445 毫秒)。在实验 2 中,同样的双任务 PRP 试验与任务 2 中的单任务试验随机混合,以加强该任务的准备。在这一实验中,近一半的参与者绕过了中心瓶颈,在任务 2 中表现出较小的双任务干扰(48 毫秒)。另外两个实验表明,初始练习本身并不能绕过瓶颈,但加强任务 2 的准备(通过任务 2 的单任务混合试验)却能绕过瓶颈。我们的结论是,如果准备得当,人们的双任务自动性要比以前认为的高得多。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
145
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
期刊最新文献
Speeded classification of visual events is sensitive to crossmodal intensity correspondence. Proactive suppression is an implicit process that cannot be summoned on demand. First impressions from faces in dynamic approach-avoidance contexts. Between-task transfer of item-specific control is replicable and extends to novel conditions. No evidence in favor of the existence of "intentional" binding.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1