Common and distinct neural correlates of dual-tasking and task-switching: a meta-analytic review and a neuro-cognitive processing model of human multitasking
Although there are well-known limitations of the human cognitive system in performing two tasks simultaneously (dual-tasking) or alternatingly (task-switching), the question for a common vs. distinct neural basis of these multitasking limitations is still open. We performed two Activation Likelihood Estimation meta-analyses of neuroimaging studies on dual-tasking or task-switching and tested for commonalities and differences in the brain regions associated with either domain. We found a common core network related to multitasking comprising bilateral intraparietal sulcus (IPS), left dorsal premotor cortex (dPMC), and right anterior insula. Meta-analytic contrasts revealed eight fronto-parietal clusters more consistently activated in dual-tasking (bilateral frontal operculum, dPMC, and anterior IPS, left inferior frontal sulcus and left inferior frontal gyrus) and, conversely, four clusters (left inferior frontal junction, posterior IPS, and precuneus as well as frontomedial cortex) more consistently activated in task-switching. Together with sub-analyses of preparation effects in task-switching, our results argue against purely passive structural processing limitations in multitasking. Based on these findings and drawing on current theorizing, we present a neuro-cognitive processing model of multitasking.
KeywordsMultitasking Cognitive control Executive function ALE meta-analysis fMRI
We thank all contacted authors who contributed results of relevant contrasts not explicitly reported in the original publications, and we apologize to all authors whose eligible papers we might have missed.
This study was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (LA 3071/3-1 to R.L. and S.B.E.; EI 816/4-1 to S.B.E.), the National Institute of Mental Health (R01-MH074457 to S.B.E.), the Helmholtz Portfolio Theme “Supercomputing and Modeling for the Human Brain” (S.B.E.), and the European Union Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under Grant agreement no. 604102 (S.B.E.).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
- Allport DA, Styles EA, Hsieh S (1994) Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In: Umilta C, Moscovitc M (eds) Attention and performance XV. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 421–452Google Scholar
- Cavina-Pratesi C, Valyear KF, Culham JC, Köhler S, Obhi SS, Marzi CA, Goodale MA (2006) Dissociating arbitrary stimulus–response mapping from movement planning during preparatory period: evidence from event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging. J Neurosci 26:2704–2713CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- DiGirolamo GJ, Kramer AF, Barad V, Cepeda NJ, Weissman DH, Milham MP, Wszalek TM, Cohen NJ, Banich MT, Webb A, Belopolsky AV, McAuley E (2001) General and task-specific frontal lobe recruitment in older adults during executive processes: a fMRI investigation of task-switching. NeuroReport 12:2065–2071CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Eickhoff SB, Laird AR, Grefkes C, Wang LE, Zilles K, Fox PT (2009) Coordinate- based activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of neuroimaging data: a random-effects approach based on empirical estimates of spatial uncertainty. Hum Brain Mapp 30:2907–2926CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- Halari R, Simic M, Pariante CM, Papadopoulos A, Cleare A, Brammer M, Fombonne E, Rubia K (2009) Reduced activation in lateral prefrontal cortex and anterior cingulate during attention and cognitive control functions in medication-naïve adolescents with depression compared to controls. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 50:307–316CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jost K, De Baene W, Koch I, Brass M (2013) A review of the role of cue processing in task switching. J Psychol 221:5–14Google Scholar
- Kahneman D (1973) Attention and effort. Prentice Hall, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Marois R, Larson JM, Chun MM, Shima D (2005) Response-specific sources of dual-task interference in human premotor cortex. Psychol Res 11:1–12Google Scholar
- Pashler H (2000) Task switching and multitask performance. In: Monsell S, Driver J (eds) Attention and performance XVIII: control of mental processes. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 277–307Google Scholar
- Welford A (1952) The ‘psychological refractory period’ and the timing of high-speed performance: a review and a theory. Br J Psychol 43:2–9Google Scholar