Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?

In situations requiring the execution of two tasks at around the same time, we need to decide which of the tasks should be executed first. Previous research has revealed several factors that affect the outcome of such response order control processes, including bottom-up factors (e.g., the temporal...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) 2021-12, Vol.74 (12), p.2097-2111
Hauptverfasser: Huestegge, Lynn, Hoffmann, Mareike A, Strobach, Tilo
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2111
container_issue 12
container_start_page 2097
container_title Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)
container_volume 74
creator Huestegge, Lynn
Hoffmann, Mareike A
Strobach, Tilo
description In situations requiring the execution of two tasks at around the same time, we need to decide which of the tasks should be executed first. Previous research has revealed several factors that affect the outcome of such response order control processes, including bottom-up factors (e.g., the temporal order of the stimuli associated with the two tasks) and top-down factors (e.g., instructions). In addition, it has been shown that tasks associated with certain response modalities are preferably executed first (e.g., temporal prioritisation of tasks involving oculomotor responses). In this study, we focused on a situation in which task order has to be unpredictably switched from trial to trial and asked whether task-order representations are coded separately or integrated with the component task sets (i.e., in a task-specific manner). Across three experiments, we combined two tasks known to differ in prioritisation, namely an oculomotor and a manual (or pedal) task. The results indicated robust task-order switch costs (i.e., longer RTs when task order was switched vs. repeated). Importantly, the data demonstrate that it is possible to show an asymmetry of task-order switch costs: While these costs were of similar size for both task orders in one particular experimental setting with specific spatial task characteristics, two experiments consistently indicated that it was easier for participants to switch to their prioritised task order (i.e., to execute the dominant oculomotor task first). This suggests that in a situation requiring frequent task-order switches (indicated by unpredictable changes in stimulus order), task order is represented in an integrated, task-specific manner, bound to characteristics (here, associated effector systems) of the component tasks.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/17470218211018416
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2531540021</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_17470218211018416</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2584275931</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-5df12f4aa9dd18b7a5fe421f75d7576278b911c6e87b7d984a9f2f8ebc09dd043</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhosouK7-AG8BL166ZtK0Sb2ILH7BggfXi5eStpO1a7epSYr4701dUVA8JZk8z8vMRNEx0BmAEGcguKAMJAOgIDlkO9FkrMWUsWz3-w5yPzpwbk0pT0QmJtHTUrmX2NgaLbHYW3TYeeUb0znSdKQeVEt8QNw5ecBeWeWRGBu-PK7GR03eGv9MKrPpTRfUT5g49O7iMNrTqnV49HVOo8frq-X8Nl7c39zNLxdxlfDUx2mtgWmuVF7XIEuhUo2cgRZpLVKRMSHLHKDKUIpS1LnkKtdMSywrGowwxzQ63eb21rwO6HyxaVyFbas6NIMrWJpAymkYPqAnv9C1GWwXuguU5EykeTJSsKUqa5yzqIveNhtl3wugxbjt4s-2gzPbOk6t8Cf1f-EDrkt_HA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2584275931</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><creator>Huestegge, Lynn ; Hoffmann, Mareike A ; Strobach, Tilo</creator><creatorcontrib>Huestegge, Lynn ; Hoffmann, Mareike A ; Strobach, Tilo</creatorcontrib><description>In situations requiring the execution of two tasks at around the same time, we need to decide which of the tasks should be executed first. Previous research has revealed several factors that affect the outcome of such response order control processes, including bottom-up factors (e.g., the temporal order of the stimuli associated with the two tasks) and top-down factors (e.g., instructions). In addition, it has been shown that tasks associated with certain response modalities are preferably executed first (e.g., temporal prioritisation of tasks involving oculomotor responses). In this study, we focused on a situation in which task order has to be unpredictably switched from trial to trial and asked whether task-order representations are coded separately or integrated with the component task sets (i.e., in a task-specific manner). Across three experiments, we combined two tasks known to differ in prioritisation, namely an oculomotor and a manual (or pedal) task. The results indicated robust task-order switch costs (i.e., longer RTs when task order was switched vs. repeated). Importantly, the data demonstrate that it is possible to show an asymmetry of task-order switch costs: While these costs were of similar size for both task orders in one particular experimental setting with specific spatial task characteristics, two experiments consistently indicated that it was easier for participants to switch to their prioritised task order (i.e., to execute the dominant oculomotor task first). This suggests that in a situation requiring frequent task-order switches (indicated by unpredictable changes in stimulus order), task order is represented in an integrated, task-specific manner, bound to characteristics (here, associated effector systems) of the component tasks.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1747-0218</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1747-0226</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/17470218211018416</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Executive function ; Multitasking</subject><ispartof>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2021-12, Vol.74 (12), p.2097-2111</ispartof><rights>Experimental Psychology Society 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-5df12f4aa9dd18b7a5fe421f75d7576278b911c6e87b7d984a9f2f8ebc09dd043</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-5df12f4aa9dd18b7a5fe421f75d7576278b911c6e87b7d984a9f2f8ebc09dd043</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1323-7336</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/17470218211018416$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/17470218211018416$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,21800,27905,27906,43602,43603</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Huestegge, Lynn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffmann, Mareike A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strobach, Tilo</creatorcontrib><title>Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?</title><title>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)</title><description>In situations requiring the execution of two tasks at around the same time, we need to decide which of the tasks should be executed first. Previous research has revealed several factors that affect the outcome of such response order control processes, including bottom-up factors (e.g., the temporal order of the stimuli associated with the two tasks) and top-down factors (e.g., instructions). In addition, it has been shown that tasks associated with certain response modalities are preferably executed first (e.g., temporal prioritisation of tasks involving oculomotor responses). In this study, we focused on a situation in which task order has to be unpredictably switched from trial to trial and asked whether task-order representations are coded separately or integrated with the component task sets (i.e., in a task-specific manner). Across three experiments, we combined two tasks known to differ in prioritisation, namely an oculomotor and a manual (or pedal) task. The results indicated robust task-order switch costs (i.e., longer RTs when task order was switched vs. repeated). Importantly, the data demonstrate that it is possible to show an asymmetry of task-order switch costs: While these costs were of similar size for both task orders in one particular experimental setting with specific spatial task characteristics, two experiments consistently indicated that it was easier for participants to switch to their prioritised task order (i.e., to execute the dominant oculomotor task first). This suggests that in a situation requiring frequent task-order switches (indicated by unpredictable changes in stimulus order), task order is represented in an integrated, task-specific manner, bound to characteristics (here, associated effector systems) of the component tasks.</description><subject>Executive function</subject><subject>Multitasking</subject><issn>1747-0218</issn><issn>1747-0226</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhosouK7-AG8BL166ZtK0Sb2ILH7BggfXi5eStpO1a7epSYr4701dUVA8JZk8z8vMRNEx0BmAEGcguKAMJAOgIDlkO9FkrMWUsWz3-w5yPzpwbk0pT0QmJtHTUrmX2NgaLbHYW3TYeeUb0znSdKQeVEt8QNw5ecBeWeWRGBu-PK7GR03eGv9MKrPpTRfUT5g49O7iMNrTqnV49HVOo8frq-X8Nl7c39zNLxdxlfDUx2mtgWmuVF7XIEuhUo2cgRZpLVKRMSHLHKDKUIpS1LnkKtdMSywrGowwxzQ63eb21rwO6HyxaVyFbas6NIMrWJpAymkYPqAnv9C1GWwXuguU5EykeTJSsKUqa5yzqIveNhtl3wugxbjt4s-2gzPbOk6t8Cf1f-EDrkt_HA</recordid><startdate>202112</startdate><enddate>202112</enddate><creator>Huestegge, Lynn</creator><creator>Hoffmann, Mareike A</creator><creator>Strobach, Tilo</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-7336</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202112</creationdate><title>Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?</title><author>Huestegge, Lynn ; Hoffmann, Mareike A ; Strobach, Tilo</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c345t-5df12f4aa9dd18b7a5fe421f75d7576278b911c6e87b7d984a9f2f8ebc09dd043</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Executive function</topic><topic>Multitasking</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Huestegge, Lynn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoffmann, Mareike A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strobach, Tilo</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Huestegge, Lynn</au><au>Hoffmann, Mareike A</au><au>Strobach, Tilo</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?</atitle><jtitle>Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)</jtitle><date>2021-12</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2097</spage><epage>2111</epage><pages>2097-2111</pages><issn>1747-0218</issn><eissn>1747-0226</eissn><abstract>In situations requiring the execution of two tasks at around the same time, we need to decide which of the tasks should be executed first. Previous research has revealed several factors that affect the outcome of such response order control processes, including bottom-up factors (e.g., the temporal order of the stimuli associated with the two tasks) and top-down factors (e.g., instructions). In addition, it has been shown that tasks associated with certain response modalities are preferably executed first (e.g., temporal prioritisation of tasks involving oculomotor responses). In this study, we focused on a situation in which task order has to be unpredictably switched from trial to trial and asked whether task-order representations are coded separately or integrated with the component task sets (i.e., in a task-specific manner). Across three experiments, we combined two tasks known to differ in prioritisation, namely an oculomotor and a manual (or pedal) task. The results indicated robust task-order switch costs (i.e., longer RTs when task order was switched vs. repeated). Importantly, the data demonstrate that it is possible to show an asymmetry of task-order switch costs: While these costs were of similar size for both task orders in one particular experimental setting with specific spatial task characteristics, two experiments consistently indicated that it was easier for participants to switch to their prioritised task order (i.e., to execute the dominant oculomotor task first). This suggests that in a situation requiring frequent task-order switches (indicated by unpredictable changes in stimulus order), task order is represented in an integrated, task-specific manner, bound to characteristics (here, associated effector systems) of the component tasks.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/17470218211018416</doi><tpages>15</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1323-7336</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1747-0218
ispartof Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2021-12, Vol.74 (12), p.2097-2111
issn 1747-0218
1747-0226
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2531540021
source SAGE Complete A-Z List
subjects Executive function
Multitasking
title Task-order representations in dual tasks: Separate or integrated with component task sets?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T23%3A59%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Task-order%20representations%20in%20dual%20tasks:%20Separate%20or%20integrated%20with%20component%20task%20sets?&rft.jtitle=Quarterly%20journal%20of%20experimental%20psychology%20(2006)&rft.au=Huestegge,%20Lynn&rft.date=2021-12&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2097&rft.epage=2111&rft.pages=2097-2111&rft.issn=1747-0218&rft.eissn=1747-0226&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/17470218211018416&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2584275931%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2584275931&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_17470218211018416&rfr_iscdi=true