Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32335762›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2021

Parallel and serial task processing in the PRP paradigm: a drift-diffusion model approach.

André Mattes, Felice Tavera, Anja Ophey, Mandy Roheger, Robert Gaschler, Hilde Haider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

André Mattes *Department of Psychology, University of Cologne, Richard-Strauss-Straße 2, 50931, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4821-8012
Felice Tavera *Department of Psychology, University of Cologne, Richard-Strauss-Straße 2, 50931, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0994-6620
Anja OpheyDepartment of Medical Psychology, Neuropsychology and Gender Studies and Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Kerpener Str. 68, 50937, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5858-7762
Mandy RohegerDepartment of Medical Psychology, Neuropsychology and Gender Studies and Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention (CeNDI), Medical Faculty, University Hospital Cologne, Kerpener Str. 68, 50937, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6015-3194
Robert GaschlerDepartment of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen, Universitätsstraße 33, 58084, Hagen, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8576-5330
Hilde HaiderDepartment of Psychology, University of Cologne, Richard-Strauss-Straße 2, 50931, Cologne, Germany. hilde.haider@uni-koeln.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7293-3166

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft GA 2246/1-1,2Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft HA 5447/11-1,2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even after a long time of research on dual-tasking, the question whether the two tasks are always processed serially (response selection bottleneck models, RSB) or also in parallel (capacity-sharing models) is still going on. The first models postulate that the central processing stages of two tasks cannot overlap, producing a central processing bottleneck in Task 2. The second class of models posits that cognitive resources are shared between the central processing stages of two tasks, allowing for parallel processing. In a series of three experiments, we aimed at inducing parallel vs. serial processing by manipulating the relative frequency of short vs. long SOAs (Experiments 1 and 2) and including no-go trials in Task 2 (Experiment 3). Beyond the conventional response time (RT) analyses, we employed drift-diffusion model analyses to differentiate between parallel and serial processing. Even though our findings were rather consistent across the three experiments, they neither support unambiguously the assumptions derived from the RSB model nor those derived from capacity-sharing models. SOA frequency might lead to an adaptation to frequent time patterns. Overall, our diffusion model results and mean RTs seem to be better explained by participant's time expectancies.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAdultAttentionDiscrimination LearningHumansMalePattern Recognition, VisualPsychomotor PerformanceReaction TimeRefractory Period, PsychologicalSerial Learning

Identifiers

PMID32335762
PMCPMC8211618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.