Engineering topics

Hazeltine, Eliot

Publications and source records attributed to Hazeltine, Eliot.

4 records

NASA NTRS2003

Dual-task interference with equal task emphasis: graded capacity sharing or central postponement?

Most studies using the psychological refractory period (PRP) design suggest that dual-task performance is limited by a central bottleneck. Because subjects are usually told to emphasize Task 1, however, the bottleneck might reflect a strategic choice rather than a structural limitation. To evaluate the possibility that central operations can proceed in parallel, albeit with capacity limitations, we conducted two dual-task experiments with equal task emphasis. In both experiments, subjects tended to either group responses together or respond to one task well before the other. In addition, stimulus-response compatibility effects were roughly constant across stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). At the short SOA, compatibility effects also carried over onto response times for the other task. This pattern of results is difficult to reconcile with the possibility that subjects share capacity roughly equally between simultaneous central operations. However, this pattern is consistent with the existence of a structural central bottleneck.

Auditory Perception↗

NASA NTRS2003

Bimanual cross-talk during reaching movements is primarily related to response selection, not the specification of motor parameters

Simultaneous reaching movements made with the two hands can show a considerable increase in reaction time (RT) when they differ in terms of direction or extent, compared to when the movements involve the same direction and extent. This cost has been attributed to cross-talk in the specification of the motor parameters for the two hands. However, a recent study [Diedrichsen, Hazeltine, Kennerley, & Ivry, (2001). Psychological Science, 12, 493-498] indicates that when reaching movements are cued by the onset of the target endpoint, no compatibility effects are observed. To determine why directly cued movements are immune from interference, we varied the stimulus onset asynchrony for the two movements and used different combinations of directly cued and symbolically cued movements. In two experiments, compatibility effects were only observed when both movements were symbolically cued. No difference was found between compatible and incompatible movements when both movements were directly cued or when one was directly cued and the other was symbolically cued. These results indicate that interference is not related to the specification of movement parameters but instead emerges from processes associated with response selection. Moreover, the data suggest that cross-talk, when present, primarily shortens the RT of the second movement on compatible trials rather than lengthening this RT on incompatible trials.

Randomized Controlled Trial↗

NASA NTRS2003

Material-dependent and material-independent selection processes in the frontal and parietal lobes: an event-related fMRI investigation of response competition

The present study used the flanker task [Percept. Psychophys. 16 (1974) 143] to identify neural structures that support response selection processes, and to determine which of these structures respond differently depending on the type of stimulus material associated with the response. Participants performed two versions of the flanker task while undergoing event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Both versions of the task required participants to respond to a central stimulus regardless of the responses associated with simultaneously presented flanking stimuli, but one used colored circle stimuli and the other used letter stimuli. Competition-related activation was identified by comparing Incongruent trials, in which the flanker stimuli indicated a different response than the central stimulus, to Neutral stimuli, in which the flanker stimuli indicated no response. A region within the right inferior frontal gyrus exhibited significantly more competition-related activation for the color stimuli, whereas regions within the middle frontal gyri of both hemispheres exhibited more competition-related activation for the letter stimuli. The border of the right middle frontal and inferior frontal gyri and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) were significantly activated by competition for both types of stimulus materials. Posterior foci demonstrated a similar pattern: left inferior parietal cortex showed greater competition-related activation for the letters, whereas right parietal cortex was significantly activated by competition for both materials. These findings indicate that the resolution of response competition invokes both material-dependent and material-independent processes.

Psychomotor Performance/physiology↗

NASA NTRS2002

Simultaneous dual-task performance reveals parallel response selection after practice

E. H. Schumacher, T. L. Seymour, J. M. Glass, D. E. Kieras, and D. E. Meyer (2001) reported that dual-task costs are minimal when participants are practiced and give the 2 tasks equal emphasis. The present research examined whether such findings are compatible with the operation of an efficient response selection bottleneck. Participants trained until they were able to perform both tasks simultaneously without interference. Novel stimulus pairs produced no reaction time costs, arguing against the development of compound stimulus-response associations (Experiment 1). Manipulating the relative onsets (Experiments 2 and 4) and durations (Experiments 3 and 4) of response selection processes did not lead to dual-task costs. The results indicate that the 2 tasks did not share a bottleneck after practice.

Practice (Psychology)↗