Prolonged Processing Time for Manual and Vocal Responses in Parkinson Disease: A Psychological Refractory Period Paradigm Study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine a potential increased cognitive processing bottleneck within Parkinson disease (PD) by extending a previous overlapping task methodology. Additionally, this study extends previous overlapping task methodology in PD to examine the influence of modality (vocal vs. manual) on response delays in overlapping tasks in PD. METHOD: This study used the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm (overlapping-task paradigm) to study processing limitations as participants complete two tasks that increasingly overlap in time. Three levels of temporal overlap of tasks were utilized to vary cognitive demands on manual and vocal response time tasks. Ten participants with PD (PwPD) and 12 participants without PD were included in this study. RESULTS: Participants with PD demonstrated response time delays across temporal overlap conditions (likely indicating motor deficits) along with a larger increase in response delays in the most overlapped, cognitively taxing condition (likely indicating longer central processing bottleneck). Additionally, modality did not influence response times differently in overlapping task conditions or within participant groups. CONCLUSION: An extension of previous overlapping task methodologies within a complex task was successful in demonstrating an increased central processing deficit across manual and vocal response delays in PD, regardless of modality of response.

The cognitive loci of the display and task-relevant set size effects on distractor interference: Evidence from a dual-task paradigm.

The congruency effect of a task-irrelevant distractor has been found to be modulated by task-relevant set size and display set size. The present study used a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm to examine the cognitive loci of the display set size effect (dilution effect) and the task-relevant set size effect (perceptual load effect) on distractor interference. A tone discrimination task (Task 1), in which a response was made to the pitch of the target tone, was followed by a letter discrimination task (Task 2) in which different types of visual target display were used. In Experiment 1, in which display set size was manipulated to examine the nature of the display set size effect on distractor interference in Task 2, the modulation of the congruency effect by display set size was observed at both short and long stimulus-onset asynchronies (SOAs), indicating that the display set size effect occurred after the target was selected for processing in the focused attention stage. In Experiment 2, in which task-relevant set size was manipulated to examine the nature of the task-relevant set size effect on distractor interference in Task 2, the effects of task-relevant set size increased with SOA, suggesting that the target selection efficiency in the preattentive stage was impaired with increasing task-relevant set size. These results suggest that display set size and task-relevant set size modulate distractor processing in different ways.

The role of feedback delay in dual-task performance.

Doing two things at once is hard, and it is probably hard for various reasons. Here we aim to demonstrate that one so far barely considered reason is the monitoring of sensory action feedback, which detracts from processing of other concurrent tasks. To demonstrate this, we engaged participants in a psychological refractory period paradigm. The responses in the two tasks produced visual action effects. These effects occurred either immediately or they were delayed for the first of the two responses. We assumed that delaying these effects would engage a process of monitoring visual feedback longer, and delay a concurrent task more, as compared to immediate effects. This prediction was confirmed in two experiments. We discuss the reasons for feedback monitoring and its possible contribution to dual tasking.

A startling acoustic stimulus interferes with upcoming motor preparation: Evidence for a startle refractory period.

When a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) is presented in a simple reaction time (RT) task, response latency is significantly shortened. The present study used a SAS in a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm to determine if a shortened RT1 latency would be propagated to RT2. Participants performed a simple RT task with an auditory stimulus (S1) requiring a vocal response (R1), followed by a visual stimulus (S2) requiring a key-lift response (R2). The two stimuli were separated by a variable stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), and a typical PRP effect was found. When S1 was replaced with a 124dB SAS, R1 onset was decreased by 40-50ms; however, rather than the predicted propagation of a shortened RT, significantly longer responses were found for RT2 on startle trials at short SOAs. Furthermore, the 100ms SOA condition exhibited reduced peak EMG for R2 on startle trials, as compared to non-startle trials. These results are attributed to the startling stimulus temporarily interfering with cognitive processing, delaying and altering the execution of the second response. In addition to this "startle refractory period," results also indicated that RT1 latencies were significantly lengthened for trials that immediately followed a startle trial, providing evidence for longer-term effects of the startling stimulus.

Evidence for a response preparation bottleneck during dual-task performance: effect of a startling acoustic stimulus on the psychological refractory period.

The present study was designed to investigate the mechanism associated with dual-task interference in a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm. We used a simple reaction time paradigm consisting of a vocal response (R1) and key-lift task (R2) with a stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between 100ms and 1500ms. On selected trials we implemented a startling acoustic stimulus concurrent with the second stimulus to determine if we could involuntarily trigger the second response. Our results indicated that the PRP delay in the second response was present for both control and startle trials at short SOAs, suggesting the second response was not prepared in advance. These results support a response preparation bottleneck and can be explained via a neural activation model of preparation. In addition, we found that the reflexive startle activation was reduced in the dual-task condition for all SOAs, a result we attribute to prepulse inhibition associated with dual-task processing.

Face perception is whole or none: disentangling the role of spatial contiguity and interfeature distances in the composite face illusion.

Compelling evidence that faces are perceived holistically or configurally comes from the composite face illusion: identical top halves of a face are perceived as being different if they are aligned with different bottom halves. The visual illusion disappears when the top and bottom face halves are spatially misaligned. Whether this is because the two halves no longer form a whole face (ie they form two segmented parts), or because of an increase in interfeatures distance in the misaligned condition (eg eyes-mouth distance) remains unclear. Here, thirty-four participants performed a delayed matching composite task in which the amount of spatial misalignment between face halves varied parametrically (from 8.33% of face width to 100%). The difference in performance between aligned and misaligned faces (ie the composite face effect) was already of full magnitude at the smallest level of misalignment. These results imply that a small spatial misalignment is sufficient to measure the composite face effect. From a theoretical standpoint, they indicate that it is the breaking of a whole configuration rather than the increase in relative distance between the face parts that explains the presence or absence of the composite face effect, clarifying an outstanding issue concerning the nature of holistic face perception.

A shared cortical bottleneck underlying Attentional Blink and Psychological Refractory Period.

Doing two things at once is difficult. When two tasks have to be performed within a short interval, the second is sharply delayed, an effect called the Psychological Refractory Period (PRP). Similarly, when two successive visual targets are briefly flashed, people may fail to detect the second target (Attentional Blink or AB). Although AB and PRP are typically studied in very different paradigms, a recent detailed neuromimetic model suggests that both might arise from the same serial stage during which stimuli gain access to consciousness and, as a result, can be arbitrarily routed to any other appropriate processor. Here, in agreement with this model, we demonstrate that AB and PRP can be obtained on alternate trials of the same cross-modal paradigm and result from limitations in the same brain mechanisms. We asked participants to respond as fast as possible to an auditory target T1 and then to a visual target T2 embedded in a series of distractors, while brain activity was recorded with magneto-encephalography (MEG). For identical stimuli, we observed a mixture of blinked trials, where T2 was entirely missed, and PRP trials, where T2 processing was delayed. MEG recordings showed that PRP and blinked trials underwent identical sensory processing in visual occipito-temporal cortices, even including the non-conscious separation of targets from distractors. However, late activations in frontal cortex (>350 ms), strongly influenced by the speed of task-1 execution, were delayed in PRP trials and absent in blinked trials. Our findings suggest that PRP and AB arise from similar cortical stages, can occur with the same exact stimuli, and are merely distinguished by trial-by-trial fluctuations in task processing.

Multisession, dual-task psychological refractory period practice benefits older and younger adults equally.

The authors tested 18 younger adults and 18 older adults on four sessions in a psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm, to see whether older adults can benefit as much from dual-task practice as younger adults. Task 1 involved tone discrimination and Task 2 involved simultaneous letter-matching. The stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the tasks was either 50, 150, 300, or 900 ms. Although older adults showed a larger PRP effect than younger adults, there were no group differences in the practice/training benefit. These results differ from Maquestiaux, Hartley, and Bertsch (2004, Psychology and Aging, 19, 649-667, Experiment 1), who found that age differences in PRP effects became progressively larger with increased practice. These findings, along with the simultaneous-presentation, dual-task work of Kramer, Larish, and Strayer (1995, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1, 50-76) and Bherer et al. (2005, Psychology and Aging, 20, 695-709; 2006, Acta Psychologica, 123, 261-278), suggest that older adults can benefit as much as younger adults from dual-task training.

Contingent capture of visual-spatial attention depends on capacity-limited central mechanisms: evidence from human electrophysiology and the psychological refractory period.

It has recently been demonstrated that a lateralized distractor that matches the individual's top-down control settings elicits an N2pc wave, an electrophysiological index of the focus of visual-spatial attention, indicating that contingent capture has a visual-spatial locus. Here, we investigated whether contingent capture required capacity-limited central resources by incorporating a contingent capture task as the second task of a psychological refractory period (PRP) dual-task paradigm. The N2pc was used to monitor where observers were attending while they performed concurrent central processing known to cause the PRP effect. The N2pc elicited by the lateralized distractor that matched the top-down control settings was attenuated in high concurrent central load conditions, indicating that although involuntary, the deployment of visual-spatial attention occurring during contingent capture depends on capacity-limited central resources.

Brain mechanisms of serial and parallel processing during dual-task performance.

The psychological refractory period (PRP) refers to the fact that humans typically cannot perform two tasks at once. Behavioral experiments have led to the proposal that, in fact, peripheral perceptual and motor stages continue to operate in parallel, and that only a central decision stage imposes a serial bottleneck. We tested this model using neuroimaging methods combined with innovative time-sensitive analysis tools. Subjects performed a dual-task visual-auditory paradigm in which a delay of 300 ms was injected into the auditory task either within or outside of the dual-task interference period. Event-related potentials indicated that the first approximately 250 ms of processing were insensitive to dual-task interference, and that the PRP was mainly reflected in a delayed global component. By a clustering analysis based on time-resolved functional magnetic resonance imaging, we identified networks with qualitatively different timing properties: sensory areas tracked the objective time of stimulus presentation, a bilateral parietoprefrontal network correlated with the PRP delay, and an extended bilateral network that included bilateral posterior parietal cortex, premotor cortex, supplementary motor area, anterior part of the insula, and cerebellum was shared by both tasks during the extent of dual-task performance. The results provide physiological evidence for the coexistence of serial and parallel processes within a cognitive task.

On the locus of dual-task interference: Is there a bottleneck at the stimulus classification stage?

Recent studies have provided evidence that dual-task interference is typically caused by a single-channel bottleneck, but the processing locus of the bottleneck has yet to be pinned down. A bottleneck locus at the response-selection stage is widely advocated, but an earlier locus would be consistent with most previous evidence. Four new experiments used the "locus of slack" method to investigate whether the stages postponed by the central bottleneck include stimulus classification, a very late stage of perceptual processing. The experiments varied stimulus classification difficulty for two different analogueue perceptual judgements. Experiment 1 found only modest absorption into slack for the difficulty of a spatial position judgement. Experiments 2-4 found virtually no absorption into slack for the difficulty of a box-width judgement. These results support a bottleneck locus beginning at or before the stage of stimulus classification and hence prior to the stage of response selection. Other evidence, however, leaves no doubt that response selection is also subject to bottleneck postponement. Two architectures are discussed that can account parsimoniously for both old and new results. One posits a single bottleneck resulting from a unified CPU-like central processor; the other posits multiple bottlenecks resulting from multiple processors accomplishing different substages of central processing.

Latent inhibition mediates N1 attenuation to repeating sounds.

Sound repetition typically reduces auditory N1 amplitudes, more so at higher rates. This has been attributed to refractoriness of N1 generators. However, evidence that N1 attenuation is delayed 300-400 ms after the first occurrence of a repeated sound suggests an alternative process, such as inhibition, that requires 300-400 ms to become fully operational. We examined the N1 to trains of fixed-interval (100, 200, 300, 400 ms) tones for evidence of effects predicted by models of refractoriness and of latent inhibition. Regardless of interval, latency of the eliciting tone from train onset determined N1 amplitudes during the first 400 ms of the train, which decreased in this window. The results show that N1 attenuation cannot be due simply to refractoriness, which would elicit the smallest N1 to the second tone. An inhibitory neural circuit can account for these and previous results, and may be important to auditory perceptual processing.