ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2021
Crosstalk, not resource competition, as a source of dual-task costs: Evidence from manipulating stimulus-action effect conceptual compatibility.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of modality compatibility on dual-task performance in a more naturalistic environment.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Network Neuroscience of Human Multitasking: Local Connections Matter.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Multitasking Practice Eliminates Modality-Based Interference by Separating Task Representations in Sensory Brain Regions.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Cortical activation changes in supratentorial stroke patients during posture-cognition dual task.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Voluntary task switching is affected by modality compatibility and preparation.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- Visuospatial cognition predicts performance on an obstructed vision obstacle walking task in older adults.Experimental gerontology · 2024Article
- Generalisation of unpredictable action-effect features: Large individual differences with little on-average effect.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2024Article
- Article
- Dual-Action Costs and Benefits in a Uni-Modal Single-Onset Paradigm.Experimental psychology · 2023Article
- When more is less: Adding action effects to reduce crosstalk between concurrently performed tasks.Cognition · 2023Article
- Multitasking Effects on Perception and Memory in Older Adults.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two related accounts of dual-task costs-multiple resource competition and crosstalk-explain why costs can be reduced when there is less overlap between the two tasks. However, distinguishing between competition for limited resources and crosstalk between concurrently performed operations has proven difficult. In the present study, we compared these two accounts with a dual-task paradigm in which participants were required to coordinate visual-manual and auditory-manual tasks with experimentally induced action effects. Critically, stimulus and response modalities were constant across conditions; what differed was the conceptual relationship between stimuli and action effects such that conceptual overlap was present either within or between tasks. We observed larger dual-task costs when related conceptual codes were present between tasks. We conclude that these results are best supported by the crosstalk account and that postresponse action effects are integrated into task representations engaged by central operations during response selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33689145What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.