ArticlePsychological research2024
On the localization of reward effects in overlapping dual tasks.
Article in Psychological research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of asymmetric cognitive load and task priority manipulation on dual-task interference.Cognitive processing · 2026Article
- On the temporal dynamics of reward utilization in dual-task situations.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In dual-task (DT) situations, performance deteriorates compared with single-task situations. Such performance decrements are frequently explained with the serial scheduling of the response selection stages constituting a bottleneck. Proof of this assumption stems from the observation that response times for the second task (task 2; RT 2) increase with decreasing stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA).In this study, we investigated how the reward prospect for task 1 performance affects task 1 and task 2 processing. For that purpose, we relied on the psychological refractory period paradigm (PRP) as a chronometric tool, to determine the locus of the reward effect in the processing chain of both tasks.We obtained improved task 1 and task 2 performance; as indicated by reduced RTs in the reward compared to the no reward condition of task 1 and task 2. Furthermore, the reward effect propagated at short SOA from task 1 onto task 2, suggesting that the locus of the reward effect can be pinpointed before or at the bottleneck of task 1. Importantly, the mean reward effect on task 1 was increased compared to task 2, thus indicating that parts of the reward effect were not propagated onto task 2, therefore affecting task 1 motor processes.In Experiment 2, we tested for the locus of the effect propagation to task 2. Therefore, we implemented a difficulty manipulation of the response selection of task 2. The results indicate that the reward effect is propagated from task 1 onto the response selection stage of task 2.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.