新型多任务范式中任务处理和选择的时间动态。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-11 DOI:10.1007/s00426-024-01971-8
Victor Mittelstädt, Ian Grant Mackenzie, Sebastian Heins, Jeff Miller
{"title":"新型多任务范式中任务处理和选择的时间动态。","authors":"Victor Mittelstädt, Ian Grant Mackenzie, Sebastian Heins, Jeff Miller","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-01971-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated the temporal dynamics of task performance and voluntary task choice within a multitasking paradigm in which the task-related processing outcomes themselves determined the to-be-performed task. In the novel forced-no-go trials, the stimulus for one task required an overt response, but the stimulus for the other task was associated with a no-go response. Task performance results showed that participants often processed the no-go task's stimulus before switching to the go-task. Dual-task interference effects and switch costs indicated various forms of multitasking interference, with their underlying causes appearing to overlap, as engagement in parallel processing seemed to be limited by switch-related reconfiguration processes. Intermixing free-choice trials, where both stimuli were associated with overt responses, revealed costs associated with switching between processing modes, providing new evidence that the distinctions between free and forced task goals stem from differences in their internal representations rather than alterations in processing due to different presentations in the environment. Task choice results align with this perspective, demonstrating a preference for repeating a free- over a forced-choice task. Furthermore, these free-choice results illuminate the interplay of cognitive (task-repetition bias) and environmental constraints (first-task bias) in shaping task choices: It appears that task-specific information increases goal activations for both task goals concurrently, with participants favoring central processing of the second- over the first-presented task to optimize their behavior when shorter central processing is required (task repetition). Overall, this study offers new insights into the dynamics of task processing and choice in environments requiring the balance of multiple tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":" ","pages":"1737-1757"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11281993/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The temporal dynamics of task processing and choice in a novel multitasking paradigm.\",\"authors\":\"Victor Mittelstädt, Ian Grant Mackenzie, Sebastian Heins, Jeff Miller\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00426-024-01971-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study investigated the temporal dynamics of task performance and voluntary task choice within a multitasking paradigm in which the task-related processing outcomes themselves determined the to-be-performed task. In the novel forced-no-go trials, the stimulus for one task required an overt response, but the stimulus for the other task was associated with a no-go response. Task performance results showed that participants often processed the no-go task's stimulus before switching to the go-task. Dual-task interference effects and switch costs indicated various forms of multitasking interference, with their underlying causes appearing to overlap, as engagement in parallel processing seemed to be limited by switch-related reconfiguration processes. Intermixing free-choice trials, where both stimuli were associated with overt responses, revealed costs associated with switching between processing modes, providing new evidence that the distinctions between free and forced task goals stem from differences in their internal representations rather than alterations in processing due to different presentations in the environment. Task choice results align with this perspective, demonstrating a preference for repeating a free- over a forced-choice task. Furthermore, these free-choice results illuminate the interplay of cognitive (task-repetition bias) and environmental constraints (first-task bias) in shaping task choices: It appears that task-specific information increases goal activations for both task goals concurrently, with participants favoring central processing of the second- over the first-presented task to optimize their behavior when shorter central processing is required (task repetition). Overall, this study offers new insights into the dynamics of task processing and choice in environments requiring the balance of multiple tasks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1737-1757\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11281993/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01971-8\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01971-8","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究调查了多任务范式中任务执行和自愿任务选择的时间动态,在多任务范式中,与任务相关的处理结果本身决定了要执行的任务。在新颖的强迫-不做试验中,一项任务的刺激要求参与者做出公开反应,而另一项任务的刺激则与不做反应相关。任务表现结果表明,被试在切换到进行任务之前,往往先处理了不进行任务的刺激。双任务干扰效应和切换成本显示了各种形式的多任务干扰,其根本原因似乎是重叠的,因为并行处理的参与似乎受到与切换相关的重组过程的限制。混合自由选择试验(两种刺激都与明显反应相关)显示了与处理模式之间切换相关的成本,从而提供了新的证据,证明自由任务目标和强迫任务目标之间的区别源于其内部表征的不同,而不是由于环境中的不同呈现而导致的处理过程的改变。任务选择结果与这一观点不谋而合,证明了重复自由选择任务比强迫选择任务更有偏好。此外,这些自由选择结果还揭示了认知(任务重复偏差)和环境限制(首次任务偏差)在影响任务选择方面的相互作用:任务特定信息似乎会同时增加两个任务目标的目标激活,当需要进行较短的中心处理(任务重复)时,参与者更倾向于对第二个任务进行中心处理,而不是对第一个任务进行中心处理,以优化他们的行为。总之,这项研究为我们提供了在需要平衡多项任务的环境中任务处理和选择动态的新见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
The temporal dynamics of task processing and choice in a novel multitasking paradigm.

This study investigated the temporal dynamics of task performance and voluntary task choice within a multitasking paradigm in which the task-related processing outcomes themselves determined the to-be-performed task. In the novel forced-no-go trials, the stimulus for one task required an overt response, but the stimulus for the other task was associated with a no-go response. Task performance results showed that participants often processed the no-go task's stimulus before switching to the go-task. Dual-task interference effects and switch costs indicated various forms of multitasking interference, with their underlying causes appearing to overlap, as engagement in parallel processing seemed to be limited by switch-related reconfiguration processes. Intermixing free-choice trials, where both stimuli were associated with overt responses, revealed costs associated with switching between processing modes, providing new evidence that the distinctions between free and forced task goals stem from differences in their internal representations rather than alterations in processing due to different presentations in the environment. Task choice results align with this perspective, demonstrating a preference for repeating a free- over a forced-choice task. Furthermore, these free-choice results illuminate the interplay of cognitive (task-repetition bias) and environmental constraints (first-task bias) in shaping task choices: It appears that task-specific information increases goal activations for both task goals concurrently, with participants favoring central processing of the second- over the first-presented task to optimize their behavior when shorter central processing is required (task repetition). Overall, this study offers new insights into the dynamics of task processing and choice in environments requiring the balance of multiple tasks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
137
期刊介绍: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.
期刊最新文献
Linguistic markedness and body specificity in parity judgments: evidence from a go/no-go task. Motion in the depth direction appears faster when the target is closer to the observer. Beneficial effects of imagination of successful action after an actual error on baseline performances in non-expert young tennis players. A systematic review of human odometry. Different effects of smooth pursuit eye movements on motion-based stimulus response congruency.
×
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