Electrophysiological evidence against parallel motor processing during multitasking. (10th October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mittelstädt, Victor; Mackenzie, Ian Grant; Leuthold, Hartmut; Miller, Jeff
• Is Part Of: Psychophysiology. Volume 59:Number 1(2022)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2021-10-10
• Subjects: cognitive control -- dual task performance -- EEG -- event‐related potentials (ERPs) -- lateralized readiness potential -- multitasking; Psychophysiology -- Periodicals; 612.8
• DOI: 10.1111/psyp.13951
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0048-5772

Abstract

Abstract: We combined behavioral measures with electrophysiological measures of motor activation (i.e., lateralized readiness potentials, LRPs) to disentangle the relative contribution of premotor and motor processes to multitasking interference in the prioritized processing paradigm. Specifically, we presented stimuli of two tasks (primary and background task) in each trial, but participants were instructed to perform the background task only if the primary task required no response. As expected, task performance was substantially influenced by a task probability manipulation: Background task responses were faster, psychological refractory period effects were smaller, and interference from the second task (i.e., backward compatibility effects) was larger when there was a larger probability that this task required a response. Critically, stimulus‐locked and response‐locked LRP analyses indicate that these behavioral effects of parallel processing were not driven by background task motor processing (e.g., motoric response activation) taking place during primary task processing. Instead, the LRP results suggest that these effects were exclusively localized during premotor stages of processing (e.g., response selection). Thus, the present results generally provide evidence for multitasking accounts allowing parallel task processing during response selection, whereas the task‐specific motor responses are activated in a serial manner. One plausible account is that multiple task information sources can be processed in parallel, with sharing of limited cognitive resources depending on task relevance, but a primary and still active task goal prevents motor activation related to the goals of other tasks in order to avoid outcome conflict. Abstract : Although it is well known that two tasks usually interfere with each other when performed concurrently, there remains debate about the causes of this interference. By monitoring movement‐related electroencephalograms, we narrowed the possible sources of multitasking interference to premotor rather than motor processes. Our findings imply that mental representations of task goals play a crucial role in coordinating multiple processing streams.