Abstract
Load theory predictions for the effects of task coordination between and within sensory modalities (vision and hearing or vision only) on the level of distraction were tested. Response competition effects in a visual flanker task when it was coordinated with an auditory discrimination task (between-modality conditions) or a visual discrimination task (within-modality conditions) were compared with single-task conditions. In the between-modality conditions, response competition effects were greater in the two- (vs. single-) task conditions irrespective of the level of discrimination task difficulty. In the within-modality conditions, response competition effects were greater in the two-task (vs. single-task) conditions only when these involved a more difficult visual discrimination task. The results provided support for the load theory prediction that executive control load leads to greater distractor interference while highlighting the effects of task modality.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baddeley, A. D. (1996). Exploring the central executive. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 1–28.
Brand, S., & Lavie, N. (2005, January). Distractor interference during task switching. Paper presented to the Experimental Psychological Society, London.
Brand, S., & Lavie, N. (2006, January). Task switching, distractor interference and stimulus-response mappings. Paper presented to the Experimental Psychological Society, London.
de Fockert, J. W., Rees, G., Frith, C. D., & Lavie, N. (2001). The role of working memory in visual selective attention. Science, 291, 1803–1806.
Desimone, R., & Duncan, J. (1995). Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 18, 193–222.
Duncan, J., Martens, S., & Ward, R. (1997). Restricted attentional capacity within but not between sensory modalities. Nature, 387, 808–810.
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.
Han, S. H., & Kim, M. S. (2004). Visual search does not remain efficient when executive working memory is working. Psychological Science, 15, 623–628.
Hunt, A. R., & Kingstone, A. (2004). Multisensory executive functioning. Brain & Cognition, 55, 325–327.
Kim, S.-Y., Kim, M.-S., & Chun, M. M. (2005). Concurrent working memory load can reduce distraction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 16524–16529.
Lavie, N. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 21, 451–468.
Lavie, N. (2000). Selective attention and cognitive control: Dissociating attentional functions through different types of load. In S. Monsell & J. Driver (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 175–194). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 75–82.
Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. W. (2005). The role of working memory in attentional capture. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12, 669–674.
Lavie, N., & de Fockert, J. [W.] (2006). Frontal control of attentional capture in visual search. Visual Cognition, 14, 863–876.
Lavie, N., Hirst, A., de Fockert, J. [W.], & Viding, E. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 339–354.
Logan, G. D. (1978). Attention in character-classification tasks: Evidence for the automaticity of component stages. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 32–63.
Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 134–140.
Rees, G., Frith, C. D., & Lavie, N. (2001). Processing of irrelevant visual motion during performance of an auditory task. Neuropsychologia, 39, 937–949.
Rubinstein, J. S., Meyer, D. E., & Evans, J. E. (2001). Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 27, 763–797.
Treisman, A. M., & Davies, A. (1973). Divided attention to ear and eye. In S. Kornblum (Ed.), Attention and performance IV (pp. 101–117). New York: Academic Press.
Woodman, G. F., & Luck, S. J. (2004). Visual search is slowed when visuospatial working memory is occupied. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 269–274.
Woodman, G. F., Vogel, E. K., & Luck, S. J. (2001). Visual search remains efficient when visual working memory is full. Psychological Science, 12, 219–224.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by an Individual European Community Marie Curie Fellowship to the first author (HPMF-CT-2002-02092), held in the lab of the second author, and by a project grant from the Wellcome Trust to the second author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brand-D’Abrescia, M., Lavie, N. Task coordination between and within sensory modalities: Effects on distraction. Perception & Psychophysics 70, 508–515 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.3.508
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.3.508