The electrophysiology of sequential adjustments of dual-task order coordination.

Performing two tasks simultaneously involves the coordination of their processing. This task coordination is particularly required in dual-task situations with varying task orders. When task order switches between subsequent trials, task order coordination leads to task order switch costs in comparison with order repetitions. However, it is open, whether task order coordination is exclusively controlled by the relation of the task orders of the current and the previous trials, or whether additional conditions such as task order before the previous trial leads to a behavioral and neural adjustment of task order coordination. To answer this question, we reanalyzed the data of two previously published experiments with order-cued dual-task paradigms. We did so with regard to whether task order switch costs and the EEG component order-switch positivity in the current dual-task trial would be modulated by order switches vs. repetitions in the previous trial (Trial N-1). In Experiment 1, we found a modulation of the task order switch costs in RTs and response reversals; these costs were reduced after an order switch compared with order repetitions in Trial N-1. In Experiment 2, there were no effects on the task order switch costs in the behavioral data. Nonetheless, we found the order-switch positivity to be strongly modulated by the order transition of the previous trial in both experiments. The order-switch positivity was substantially reduced if the previous trial was an order switch (compared to an order repetition) by itself. This implies that order coordination of dual tasks is adjusted in a gradual way depending on trial's history.

A mechanism underlying improved dual-task performance after practice: Reviewing evidence for the memory hypothesis.

Extensive practice can significantly reduce dual-task costs (i.e., impaired performance under dual-task conditions compared with single-task conditions) and, thus, improve dual-task performance. Among others, these practice effects are attributed to an optimization of executive function skills that are necessary for coordinating tasks that overlap in time. In detail, this optimization of dual-task coordination skills is associated with the efficient instantiation of component task information in working memory at the onset of a dual-task trial. In the present paper, we review empirical findings on three critical predictions of this memory hypothesis. These predictions concern (1) the preconditions for the acquisition and transfer of coordination skills due to practice, (2) the role of task complexity and difficulty, and (3) the impact of age-related decline in working memory capacity on dual-task optimization.

The impact of food stimuli and fasting on cognitive control in task switching.

Previous research demonstrated motivation-control interactions in task switching. However, motivational effects on switch costs have been mostly examined using monetary rewards. Here, we investigated whether stimulus material linked to food and fasting affect control processes in task switching. We predicted that switching to the task comprising food stimuli would be facilitated, which should result in lower switch costs for this task, and that these effects would be stronger with higher motivational salience of the food stimuli, i.e. in hungry individuals and/or individuals with restrictive eating. Participants switched between categorising food items as sweet or savoury and digits as odd or even in two task-switching paradigms: an alternating runs and a voluntary task switching. Hunger was induced by 14 h fasting in the experimental compared to the control group. Results showed lower switch costs for the motivational-affective food task in both task-switching paradigms and in both groups. Switch costs for the neutral digit task were significantly higher in the fasting group compared to the control group in alternating runs task switching only. Individual differences in restrictive eating were related negatively but not significantly to the size of the switch costs. All in all, the results demonstrate an impact of motivational-affective stimuli on cognitive control in task switching and suggest a potential modulatory role of motivational states, though the findings need to be replicated.

Individual differences fill the uncharted intersections between cognitive structure, flexibility, and plasticity in multitasking.

It has been recently suggested that research on human multitasking is best organized according to three research perspectives, which differ in their focus on cognitive structure, flexibility, and plasticity. Even though it is argued that the perspectives should be seen as complementary, there has not been a formal approach describing or explaining the intersections between the three perspectives. With this theoretical note, we would like to show that the explicit consideration of individual differences is one possible way to elaborate in more detail on how and why the perspectives complement each other. We will define structure, flexibility, and plasticity; describe what constitutes individual differences; will outline selected empirical examples; and raise possible future research questions helping to develop the research field. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

On the organization of task-order and task-specific information in dual-task situations.

Dual-tasks (DT) require the employment of task-order representations that schedule the processing of 2 tasks. Evidence for this assumption stems from the observation that in DTs with variable order, performance is improved in trials with repeated processing order relative to the preceding trial in comparison to trials with reversed processing order. So far, it is an open question whether these order representations only contain order information or whether they also integrate component task information. To tackle this question, we applied a DT with variable task-order consisting of an auditory and a visual task. In Experiment 1, in addition to task-order, the visual task varied randomly from trial to trial while the auditory task kept constant. In Experiment 2, the auditory task varied. In Experiment 3, both component tasks varied. In all experiments, performance benefits occurred in trials with a repeated relative to trials with a reversed processing order, irrespective of a repeated or a changed component task. This indicates that order representations in DTs only contain order information. The findings are in line with the view that multitasking situations are represented as an agglomeration of distinct components that can be individually adjusted to changing task demands. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

The role of working memory for task-order coordination in dual-task situations.

Dual-task (DT) situations require task-order coordination processes that schedule the processing of two temporally overlapping tasks. Theories on task-order coordination suggest that these processes rely on order representations that are actively maintained and processed in working memory (WM). Preliminary evidence for this assumption stems from DT situations with variable task order, where repeating task order relative to the preceding trials results in improved performance compared to changing task order, indicating the processing of task-order information in WM between two succeeding trials. We directly tested this assumption by varying WM load during a DT with variable task order. In Experiment 1, WM load was manipulated by varying the number of stimulus-response mappings of the component tasks. In Experiment 2A, WM load was increased by embedding an additional WM updating task in the applied DT. In both experiments, the performance benefit for trials with repeated relative to trials with changed task order was reduced under high compared to low WM load. These results confirm our assumption that the processing of the task-order information relies on WM resources. In Experiment 2B, we tested whether the results of Experiment 2A can be attributed to introducing an additional task per se rather than to increased WM load by introducing an additional task with a low WM load. Importantly, in this experiment, the processing of order information was not affected. In sum, the results of the three experiments indicate that task-order coordination relies on order information which is maintained in an accessible state in WM during DT processing.

Investigation of reward effects in overlapping dual-task situations.

In dual-task (DT) situations, performance in reaction time and error rates decrease compared with single-task situations. These performance decrements are usually explained with the serial processing at the response selection stage constituting a bottleneck. Evidence for 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 the effect of reward on bottleneck processing in DTs. In Experiment 1, we addressed two questions. First, does reward provided for task 2 performance affect task 2 performance, or does it affect task 1 performance? To conclude whether reward affected task 2 or task 1 performance, we relied on the psychological refractory period paradigm (PRP) as a chronometric tool. Second, we asked for the locus of the reward effect within the DT stream. We demonstrated shorter RTs in task 1 in a rewarded compared with an un-rewarded condition indicating reward affected task 1 processing. Furthermore, this reward effect is propagated onto task 2 at short SOA suggesting that the locus of the reward effect can be pinpointed before or at the bottleneck of task 1. In Experiment 2, we tested for the locus of the effect propagation onto task 2. To this end, we implemented an additional difficulty manipulation of the response selection of task 2 and found that the reward effect is propagated from task 1 onto the response selection stage of task 2.

Neural Correlates of Task-order Preparation in Dual Tasks: An EEG Study.

Dual-task scenarios require a coordinated regulation of the processing order of component tasks in light of capacity limitations during response selection. A number of behavioral and neuroimaging findings suggest a distinct set of control processes involved in preparing this task order. In this study, we investigated electrophysiological correlates of task-order preparation in a variant of the overlapping dual-task paradigm with cue-determined task order that resulted in trials with blockwise fixed task order as well as trials with repeated and switched task order in blocks with variable task order. During the cue-stimulus interval, we found an earlier centroparietal order-mixing positivity and a later parietal order-switch positivity. A decoding approach based on multivariate pattern analysis showed that the order-mixing positivity is a necessary prerequisite for successful order selection, whereas the order-switch positivity appears to facilitate the implementation of a new task order after its selection. These correlates of order preparation share striking similarities to commonly found potentials involved in the preparation of individual tasks in the (single-)task-switching paradigm, which is strong empirical support for the account that the underlying preparatory processes are to be considered as higher-level control signals that are implemented independently of specific task representations.

A Gratton-like effect concerning task order in dual-task situations.

Performing two tasks simultaneously involves the coordination of their processing. Task coordination is particularly required in dual-task situations with varying order of the component tasks. When task order switches between subsequent trials, task-order coordination leads to order switch costs in comparison to task order repetitions (i.e., worse performance in trials associated with an order switch compared to an order repetition). However, the adaptive characteristics of task-coordination processes and order switch costs are underspecified so far. For example, studies on conflict control have shown that these coordination processes can be modulated in response to changes in task demands. The present study investigated therefore whether task-order coordination processes are modulated by the previous experience of a task-order switch. To investigate order switch costs in a dual-task situation with two sensorimotor tasks with variable task-order, we analyzed performance in current trials with task-order switches and with task-order repetitions following task-order switches and task order repetitions in the preceding trial. The data of four different experimental conditions showed that order switch costs were reduced in trials following task-order switches compared to task-order repetitions; resembling the Gratton effect commonly observed in conflict adaptation paradigms. We discussed the present results in the context of task-order set representations, cognitive control theories, and dual-task models.

Endogenous control of task-order preparation in variable dual tasks.

Dual-task performance typically leads to performance impairments in comparison to single tasks (i.e., dual-task costs). The literature discusses the contribution to these dual-task costs due to (1) bottleneck limitations in the dual-component tasks and (2) executive control processes regulating access to this bottleneck. Previous studies investigated the characteristics of executive control processes primarily triggered by external stimulus information. In the present study, however, we investigated the existence as well as the characteristics of internally triggered and driven endogenous control processes to regulate bottleneck access. In detail, we presented dual-task blocks with varying task orders and informed participants in advance about repetitions of the same task order as well as switches between different task orders (i.e., task-order repetitions and switches were predictable). Experiment 1 demonstrated that task-order information and an increased preparation time generally increase the efficiency for endogenous task-order control and improves preparation for task-order switches. This finding is basically consistent with the assumption of the existence of endogenous control processes. Experiment 2, however, did not provide evidence that this endogenous control is related with working-memory maintenance mechanisms. Experiment 3 showed that endogenous control does not only fully complete task-order preparation but also requires exogenous, stimulus-driven components.

The Causal Role of the Lateral Prefrontal Cortex for Task-order Coordination in Dual-task Situations: A Study with Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Dual tasks are characterized by the requirement for additional task-order coordination processes that schedule the processing order of two temporally overlapping tasks. Preliminary evidence from functional imaging studies suggests that lateral pFC (lPFC) activation correlates with implementing these task-order coordination processes. However, so far, it is unclear whether the lPFC is also causally involved in coordinating task order during dual-task performance and which exact mechanisms are implemented by this brain region. In this study, we addressed these open issues by applying online TMS during a dual-task situation. For this purpose, participants performed a dual task in fixed-order blocks with a constant order of tasks and in random-order block, in which the order of tasks varied randomly and thus demands on task-order coordination were increased. In Experiment 1, TMS of the lPFC compared with control TMS conditions impaired dual-task performance in random-order blocks, whereas performance in fixed-order blocks was unaffected by TMS. In Experiment 2, we tested for the specificity of the lPFC TMS effect on task-order coordination by applying TMS over the preSMA. We showed that preSMA TMS did not affect dual-task performance, neither in fixed-order nor in random-order blocks. Results of this study indicate that the lPFC, but not the preSMA, is causally involved in implementing task-order coordination processes in dual-task situations.

Processing order in dual-task situations: The "first-come, first-served" principle and the impact of task order instructions.

When two overlapping tasks are processed, they hit a bottleneck at a central processing stage that prevents simultaneous processing of the two tasks. Thus far, however, the factors determining the processing order of the tasks at the bottleneck are unknown. The present study was designed to (re)investigate whether the arrival times of the two tasks at the central bottleneck are a key determinant of the processing order (cf. Sigman & Dehaene, 2006). To this end, we implemented a visual-auditory dual task with a random stimulus order, in which we manipulated arrival time by prolonging the initial, perceptual processing stage (stimulus analysis) of the visual task and compared the effects of this manipulation with those of one impacting the central bottleneck stage of the visual task. Additionally, we implemented two instruction conditions: Participants were told to respond either in the order of stimulus presentation or in the order they preferred. The manipulation of the visual perception stage led to an increase in task response reversals (i.e., the response order was different from the order of stimulus presentation), whereas there was no such increase when the bottleneck stage was manipulated. This pattern provides conclusive evidence that the processing order at the bottleneck is (at least in part) determined by the arrival times of the tasks at that point. Reaction time differences between the two instruction conditions indicated that additional control processes are engaged in determining task processing order when the participants are expressly told to respond in the order of stimulus presentation.

The impact of free-order and sequential-order instructions on task-order regulation in dual tasks.

Dual tasks (DTs) are characterized by the requirement for additional mechanisms that coordinate the processing order of two temporally overlapping tasks. These mechanisms are indicated by two types of costs that occur when comparing DT blocks with fixed and random orders of the component tasks. On a block level, task-order control costs are reflected in increased reaction times (RTs) in random-order compared to fixed-order blocks, indicating global, monitoring-based, coordination mechanisms. On a trial level, within random-order blocks, order-switch costs are indicated by increased RTs on order switch compared to order repetition trials, reflecting memory-based mechanisms that guide task-order in DTs. To test the nature of these mechanisms in two experiments, participants performed DTs in fixed- and random-order blocks. In random-order blocks, participants were either instructed to respond to both tasks according to the order of task presentation (sequential-order instruction) or instructed to freely decide in which order to perform both tasks (free-order instruction). As a result of both experiments, we demonstrated that task-order control costs were reduced under the free-order compared to the sequential-order instruction, whereas order-switch costs were not affected by our instruction manipulation. This pattern of results suggests that the task-order control costs reflect global processes of task-order regulation such as engaging monitoring processes that are sensitive to changes in order instructions, while order-switch costs reflect rather local memory-based mechanisms that occur irrespective of any effort to coordinate task-order.

Transferability of Dual-Task Coordination Skills after Practice with Changing Component Tasks.

Recent research has demonstrated that dual-task performance with two simultaneously presented tasks can be substantially improved as a result of practice. Among other mechanisms, theories of dual-task practice-relate this improvement to the acquisition of task coordination skills. These skills are assumed (1) to result from dual-task practice, but not from single-task practice, and (2) to be independent from the specific stimulus and response mappings during the practice situation and, therefore, transferable to new dual task situations. The present study is the first that provides an elaborated test of these assumptions in a context with well-controllable practice and transfer situations. To this end, we compared the effects of dual-task and single-task practice with a visual and an auditory sensory-motor component task on the dual-task performance in a subsequent transfer session. Importantly, stimulus and stimulus-response mapping conditions in the two component tasks changed repeatedly during practice sessions, which prevents that automatized stimulus-response associations may be transferred from practice to transfer. Dual-task performance was found to be improved after practice with the dual tasks in contrast to the single-task practice. These findings are consistent with the assumption that coordination skills had been acquired, which can be transferred to other dual-task situations independently on the specific stimulus and response mapping conditions of the practiced component tasks.