Figure 2 - uploaded by Nathan Ward
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Performing two cognitive tasks at the same time can degrade performance for either domain-general reasons (e.g., both tasks require attention) or domain-specific reasons (e.g., both tasks require visual working memory). We tested predictions of these two accounts of interference on the task of driving while using language, a naturally occurring dua...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... pairwise comparisons using Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) for pairwise comparisons indicated that each of the experimental conditions (motor, visual, and ab- stract) induced greater reaction times than the control condition (all ps .01; all ds 0.25), in both analysis by participants and items, but there were no other significant differences (see Figure 2). Following distance (the mean distance the driver stayed behind the lead vehicle throughout the entire drive) also differed depend- ing on language condition. ...
Similar publications
The present study tried to specify how much processing speed, working memory capacity, and inhibition capability contribute to the effects of aging on language performance. An individual-differences approach was used to examine the component processes that predict performance in language comprehension and verbal long-term memory tasks. A total of 1...
Previous research on language comprehension has used the eyes as a window into processing. However, these methods are entirely reliant upon using visual or orthographic stimuli that map onto the linguistic stimuli being used. The potential danger of this method is that the pictures used may not perfectly match the internal aspects of language proce...
There is mounting evidence that language comprehension
Citations
... Furthermore, talking on a mobile phone can result in a deficit in the ability to recall objects that have been directly fixated during the conversation (Strayer & Drews, 2007). Interestingly, the dual-task impairment of talking on a mobile phone is not a direct result of the manual conflict of physically holding a phone while driving as the interference is also observed when conversing on hands-free devices (e.g., Bergen et al., 2013;Sanbonmatsu et al., 2016;Strayer & Drews, 2007;Strayer et al., 2006;Strayer & Johnston, 2001). Instead, having a conversation leads to a deficit in cognitive resources needed to do other tasks. ...
... Kunar et al. (2008) proposed that with respect to attention and conversations, the competition for resources would have to occur at a central, amodal level, given that the tasks primarily originate from different modalities (e.g., vision for attention and auditory and speech production for the conversation). Bergen et al. (2013) also investigated whether the deficit of having a phone conversation on driving behavior occurred due to domain-general interference or domain-specific interference. Domain-general theories suggest that there is one overall attentional resource pool that is needed for all modalities (akin to the attentional capacity theory proposed by Kahneman, 1973). ...
... This suggests that tasks would only compete for attentional resources and thus interfere with each other, if they shared an overlap in modality or processing codes. In their research, Bergen et al. (2013) found evidence for both domain-general interference in a participants' braking RTs and domain-specific interference in a distance following task (in which participants were asked to maintain a specific distance from a lead vehicle). Gunnell et al. (2020) investigated whether conversational competition for attentional resources would lead to interference of specific attentional mechanisms, or whether it would just lead to a delay in our ability to respond. ...
Previous work has shown that talking on a mobile phone leads to an impairment of visual attention. Gunnell et al. (2020) investigated the locus of these dual-task impairments and found that although phone conversations led to cognitive delays in response times, other mechanisms underlying particular selective attention tasks were unaffected. Here, we investigated which attentional networks, if any, were impaired by having a phone conversation. We used the attentional network task (ANT) to evaluate performance of the alerting, orienting, and executive attentional networks, both in conditions where people were engaged in a conversation and where they were silent. Two experiments showed that there was a robust delay in response across all three networks. However, at the individual network level, holding a conversation did not influence the size of the alerting or orienting effects but it did reduce the size of the conflict effect within the executive network. The findings suggest that holding a conversation can reduce the overall speed of responding and, via its influence on the executive network, can reduce the amount of information that can be processed from the environment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
... More generally, our paradigm provides a useful tool for measuring the Introduction Drivers face many overlapping and often competing demands on their limited information processing resources while navigating the driving environment (da Silva, 2014;Metz et al., 2011;Regan et al., 2011;Young et al., 2007). This is especially the case when drivers concurrently engage in conversation (Bergen et al., 2013;Linardoua et al., 2018;. In this scenario, drivers simultaneously operate and control the movement of a vehicle on a roadway (Fuller, 2005), and exchange verbal information with an interlocutor (Levinson & Torreira, 2015). ...
... When drivers concurrently engage in conversation, they must carefully balance the demands of listening, planning, speaking, and reading as each of these may interfere with driving performance (Salvucci & Beltowska, 2008). However, while the processes underlying the comprehension of language (both speech and text) are thought to be less demanding on attentional resources than those involved with speech planning and production (Bergen et al., 2013;Christodoulides, 2016;Kubose et al., 2006), these differences are not well addressed in the dual-tasking literature involving driving and conversation. In particular, since people switch rapidly between comprehension, speech planning and production, any examination of the mechanisms underlying the interference between verbal tasks and driving should focus on dynamic changes that occur on a time scale of less than a hundred milliseconds (Laganaro et al., 2012). ...
We report results from a driving simulator paradigm we developed to test the fine temporal effects of verbal tasks on simultaneous tracking performance. A total of 74 undergraduate students participated in two experiments in which they controlled a cursor using the steering wheel to track a moving target and where the dependent measure was overall deviation from target. Experiment 1 tested tracking performance during slow and fast target speeds under conditions involving either no verbal input or output, passive listening to spoken prompts via headphones, or responding to spoken prompts. Experiment 2 was similar except that participants read written prompts overlain on the simulator screen instead of listening to spoken prompts. Performance in both experiments was worse during fast speeds and worst overall during responding conditions. Most significantly, fine scale time-course analysis revealed deteriorating tracking performance as participants prepared and began speaking and steadily improving performance while speaking. Additionally, post-block survey data revealed that conversation recall was best in responding conditions, and perceived difficulty increased with task complexity. Our study is the first to track temporal changes in interference at high resolution during the first hundreds of milliseconds of verbal production and comprehension. Our results are consistent with load-based theories of multitasking performance and show that language production, and, to a lesser extent, language comprehension tap resources also used for tracking. More generally, our paradigm provides a useful tool for measuring dynamical changes in tracking performance during verbal tasks due to the rapidly changing resource requirements of language production and comprehension.
... Indeed, there is evidence that the processing of speech with salient visuospatial content affects the performance of tasks involving visual perception more than speech without such content (e.g., Bergen et al., 2007). Critically, Bergen et al. (2013) found that performance in a car following task was worse when the participant had to concurrently verify the veracity of sentences with salient visual content than relatively more abstract sentences. Briggs et al. (2016;Experiment 1) found consistent results for the detection of hazards in films of driving situations. ...
... In particular, the affected tasks would be those that rely on cognitive control (i.e., tasks that are novel, unpredictable, or intrinsically difficult for the driver), whereas tasks that can be performed in a more automatic way would be unaffected or even improved. To support this idea, on the one hand, these authors cite studies showing that having a phone conversation impacts on tasks depending on cognitive control, such as the visual scanning of the driving environment (e.g., Reimer et al., 2012), braking in response to the onset of the brake lights of the preceding vehicle (e.g., Bergen et al., 2013), maintaining the lane in windy conditions (e.g., Medeiros-Ward et al., 2014), controlling the vehicle speed accordingly to explicit speed restrictions (e.g., Recarte and Nunes, 2002), or deciding whether it is safe to perform a turn across the path of oncoming vehicles (e.g., Cooper et al., 2003). On the other hand, there are also studies suggesting that having a phone conversation does not alter more automatic tasks, such as braking to avoid an impending, unexpected collision (e.g., Horrey and Wickens, 2006), maintaining the vehicle in lane in good weather conditions (e.g., Cooper et al., 2013), or controlling the preferred speed (e.g., Recarte and Nunes, 2002). ...
... Finally, it should be noted that the heart rate was recorded while the participant was listening to the question until the participant gave the response to the VMS. Since the response to the VMS was generally earlier than the answer to the question (over 95 % of all trials), this measure of cognitive effort would not additionally reflect the effect of the answer production, which, accordingly to research, would be even greater than the effect of just listening to speech (Bergen et al., 2013;Coleman et al., 2016). ...
We examined the effects of different types of cognitive distraction coming from a hands-free phone conversation on the processing of information provided by variable message signs (VMS), on driving performance indicators, and on a physiological index of mental effort (heart rate). Participants drove a route in a driving simulator and had to respond to VMS messages under three conditions: no-distraction, visuospatial distraction (attending phone calls with questions inducing visuospatial processing), and conceptual distraction (attending phone calls with questions requiring semantic memory). Results showed more errors responding to VMS messages in the visuo-spatial distraction condition. In addition, both types of questions increased the intraindividual variability of response distances and the heart rate, as compared to the no-distraction condition. These results provide new evidence that talking on a hands-free phone entails costs in the processing of traffic information (in particular, text messages displayed on VMS) and it increases the driver's cognitive effort. Interestingly, the cognitive distraction had no effect on the driver's control of the vehicle speed or lateral position. Therefore, the effects of potential risk factors can critically vary among the different driving subtasks due to modulatory factors, such as the level of attentional task demands (relatively high in the processing of messages on VMS, but relatively low in controlling the speed and lateral position of the vehicle in quiet traffic conditions). In consequence, the current paper provides new evidence to discuss hands-free phone policies and highlights the importance of designing technological countermeasures to prevent drivers missing critical information displayed on VMS.
... The smaller the SOA, the bigger is the overlap in time between two tasks (Pashler 1994a). This effect is very robust and widely generalizable for various kinds of tasks, from driving (Bergen et al. 2013;Levy and Pashler 2008) to time evaluation (Brown et al. 2013). The results have been taken to indicate limitations in parallel processing and the presence of central capacity limitations (Lien et al. 2006;Pashler et al. 2008). ...
The reciprocal link between scope of attention and emotional processing is an important aspect of the relationship between emotion and attention. Larger scope of attention or global processing has been linked to positive emotions and narrow scope of attention or local processing has been linked to negative emotions. The nature of this relationship in the context of central capacity limitations and individual differences in attentional processing has not been studied in detail so far. To investigate such a relationship, here we used the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm, in which we manipulated the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA: 150 ms, 300 ms, 900 ms) of stimuli corresponding to two tasks in a sequence. The first task was identifying a number at the global or local level; the second task was recognizing the emotional expression (happy or angry). Additionally, predisposition towards local or global perceptual dimension was measured with the global–local task. Results indicated that global precedence modulated PRP effect and that response accuracy was impaired by the combination of local–angry task modalities. Interestingly, interference between simultaneous tasks was modulated by the predisposition to different perceptual levels resulting in different cognitive strategies for performing simultaneous tasks: locally biased subjects tended more towards serial processing, meanwhile globally biased ones were performing tasks in a parallel manner. This result suggest that individual differences may play a role in the choice of dual-task performing strategies.
... radio programs, conversation). The sensitivity of these tasks to attentional interference has been demonstrated in several studies 11 , but some 12 further indicated that the processing costs on visual tasks only emerged when participants had to act upon the concurrent auditory information. This indicates that central bottlenecks are bound to active, high demanding tasks. ...
Even when speakers are not actively doing another task, they can be interfered in their speech planning by concurrent auditory stimuli. In this study, we used picture naming with passive hearing, or active listening, combined to high-density electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings to investigate the locus and origin of interference on speech production. Participants named pictures while ignoring (or paying attention to) auditory syllables presented at different intervals (+150 ms, +300 ms or +450 ms). Interference of passive hearing was observed at all positive stimulus onset asynchronies (SOA) including when distractors appeared 450 ms after picture onset. Analyses of ERPs and microstates revealed modulations appearing in a time-window close to verbal response onset likely relating to post-lexical planning processes. A shift of latency of the N1 auditory component for syllables displayed 450 ms after picture onset relative to hearing in isolation was also observed. Data from picture naming with active listening to auditory syllables also pointed to post-lexical interference. The present study suggests that, beyond the lexical stage, post-lexical processes can be interfered and that the reciprocal interference between utterance planning and hearing relies on attentional demand and possibly competing neural substrates.
... To give an overview of the results we found a decrease in attentional task performance when participants were engaged in a conversation, but minimal disruption on attentional task performance when they listened to a conversation. Bergen, Medeiros-Ward, Wheeler, Drews, and Strayer (2013) have investigated whether the deficit of conversation occurs due to domain-general or domain-specific reasons. They suggested that the reason for the dual-task cost can be broadly split into two categories. ...
... This theory is in line with the multiple resource theory proposed by Wickens (1984Wickens ( , 2002. Bergen et al. (2013) concluded that different attentional theories cover different components of driving. For example, braking reaction times (RTs) in a simulated driving test showed a domain-general interference effect, whereas following distance showed a domain-specific interference effect. ...
... The current data also address the issue of what theory is responsible for the dual-task attentional deficit observed while conversing. Bergen et al. (2013) found, when looking at braking RTs, a domain-general theory best accounted for their results; however, when they looked at following distance they found some evidence for a domain-specific account. Our results can give insight into which theory is responsible for the dual-task deficit of conversation on attention. ...
It is well-documented that telephone conversations lead to impaired driving performance. Kunar et al. (Psychon Bull Rev 15:1135–1140, 2008) showed that this deficit was, in part, due to a dual-task cost of conversation on sustained visual attention. Using a multiple object tracking (MOT) task they found that the act of conversing on a hands-free telephone resulted in slower response times and increased errors compared to when participants performed the MOT task alone. The current study investigates whether the dual-task impairment of conversation on sustained attention is affected by conversation difficulty or task difficulty, and whether there was a dual-task deficit on attention when participants overheard half a conversation. Experiment 1 manipulated conversation difficulty by asking participants to discuss either easy questions or difficult questions. The results showed that there was no difference in the dual-task cost depending on conversation difficulty. Experiment 2 showed a similar dual-task deficit of attention in both an easy and a difficult visual search task. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that in contrast to work using a dot tracking and choice reaction time task (Emberson et al., Psychol Sci 21:1383–1388, 2010), there was little deficit on MOT performance of hearing half a conversation, provided people heard the conversations in their native language. The results are discussed in terms of a resource-depleted account of attentional resources showing a fixed conversational-interference cost on attention.
... Now, in addition, there is a third mode that plays a key role: "cyber-centric" attention, oriented "elseward" to the realms of remote natural and artificial agents in Cyberspace. Dealing with the Web is not just about attending to screens; it is about total immersion in a reality where cell-phoning or texting while walking, bike riding, or driving leads inevitably to distraction, potential destruction, and sometimes even death (13). k ...
... With regard to driving performance, wind affected both lateral and longitudinal vehicle control; however, cognitive workload affected longitudinal vehicle control but not lateral vehicle control. The fact that we found that our cognitive dual task strongly affected longitudinal control, namely, lead car following distance, is consistent with prior studies that have claimed that longitudinal vehicle control is a tactical higher-order task requiring executive function and working memory (Bergen, Medeiros-Ward, Wheeler, Drews, & Strayer, 2013). Specifically, drivers must keep the desired headway active in working memory while monitoring the actual headway, continually compare the two, and then make appropriate decisions about speeding up or slowing down. ...
Objective
We implemented a gaze-contingent useful field of view paradigm to examine older adult multitasking performance in a simulated driving environment.
Background
Multitasking refers to the ability to manage multiple simultaneous streams of information. Recent work suggests that multitasking declines with age, yet the mechanisms supporting these declines are still debated. One possible framework to better understand this phenomenon is the useful field of view, or the area in the visual field where information can be attended and processed. In particular, the useful field of view allows for the discrimination of two competing theories of real-time multitasking, a general interference account and a tunneling account.
Methods
Twenty-five older adult subjects completed a useful field of view task that involved discriminating the orientation of lines in gaze-contingent Gabor patches appearing at varying eccentricities (based on distance from the fovea) as they operated a vehicle in a driving simulator. In half of the driving scenarios, subjects also completed an auditory two-back task to manipulate cognitive workload, and during some trials, wind was introduced as a means to alter general driving difficulty.
Results
Consistent with prior work, indices of driving performance were sensitive to both wind and workload. Interestingly, we also observed a decline in Gabor patch discrimination accuracy under high cognitive workload regardless of eccentricity, which provides support for a general interference account of multitasking.
Conclusion
The results showed that our gaze-contingent useful field of view paradigm was able to successfully examine older adult multitasking performance in a simulated driving environment.
Application
This study represents the first attempt to successfully measure dynamic changes in the useful field of view for older adults completing a multitasking scenario involving driving.
... Many works have failed to eliminate it, even by modifying experiment instructions or incentives (reviewed in Pashler, 1994). PRP effect has been proven to be present, not only with simplified laboratory forced choice tasks, but even in such real world simulation, as driving activity (Bergen, Medeiros-Ward, Wheeler, Drews, Strayer, 2013, Hibberd, Jamson, Carsten, 2013, Levy, Pashler, Boer, 2006, Levy, Pashler, 2008, hedonistic choice -Iowa gambling task (Pashler, Harris, Nuechterlein, 2008), time evaluation task (Brown, 1998, Brown, Collier, Night, 2003, spoken word tasks (Besner, Reynolds, O'Malley, 2009, Roelfs, 2008. Liepelt and Prinz (2011) have even induced the PRP effect to their social experiment with two individuals. ...
The paper scrutinizes problematics of emotion perception in a Psychological refractory period paradigm. After extensive analysis of the PRP literature, data from two experiments are reported. Both of the experiments employ emotional facial expressions as a second task in a PRP paradigm, with the goal to explore the interference between emotion perception and a simple auditory task (experiment1) or a global-local task (experiment2). Data analysis adheres to the vast literature on the role of attention in emotion perception.
... This means they are less able to detect any potential hazards that might occur to the sides of the vehicle (such as a pedestrian about to step into the road) because they are not scanning these regions. (2) Even though their eyes are positioned straight ahead, drivers show reduced awareness of information from that direction, due to 'inattentional blindness': visual imagery from the phone conversation competes with the external world for processing resources, increasing the risk of inattentional blindness (Mack and Rock, 1998) and hence 'looked but failed to see' errors (Strayer & Drews 2007;Briggs et al. 2016;Bergen et al. 2013). (3) In order to maintain performance in what are seen as the 'primary' tasks in driving, such as lane-keeping and collision avoidance, drivers divert resources from other tasks (cf. ...
... In Experiment 2, issues of perception and comprehension are also apparent for dual tasking participants, where an overreliance on expectations, based on past experiences, meant that unexpected yet driving relevant events were not identified, preventing informed decision making and the execution of an appropriate reaction to the event. Explanations for these findings can also be couched in terms of schema-driven processing (Neisser, 1976;Norman and Shallice, 1986) leading to a reduced awareness of the situation (Smith and Hancock, 1995) which can in turn contribute to decreased dual tasking performance (Bergen et al., 2013). ...
The impact of attentional set and situation awareness on event detection and reaction times was investigated in 2 simulated driving experiments. Experiment 1: thirty participants viewed and reacted to thirty driving films containing unexpected items which were either driving congruent or incongruent. Group 1 completed the task without distraction; group 2 completed a concurrent conversation task. Experiment 2: thirty participants viewed and reacted to twenty driving films which contained unexpected yet driving relevant events. Half of the participants completed the task without distraction and half completed a concurrent conversation task. Measures of event detection and reaction time were recorded for both experiments. Compared to undistracted participants, dual-taskers reacted to fewer unexpected events; recorded longer reaction times; and reacted to fewer incongruent and peripheral events, suggesting an enduring attentional set for driving. Dual tasking drivers may adopt a strategy of over-reliance on schema-driven processing when attention is shared between tasks.
