Dual-task Measures Research Articles

A paradox in the laterality of melody processing

Melody lateralisation has been examined extensively, using well known behavioural techniques−dichotic/monaural listening and dual tasks. The literature using these techniques has produced paradoxical results for the lateralisation of melody processing particularly with non-musicians. Research using the dichotic/monaural listening paradigm suggests right hemisphere processing for non-musicians while the dual task paradigm has suggested a left hemisphere dominance. The current study utilises both monaural listening and dual task techniques within trials. The results replicated the paradox in the literature. The dichotic/monaural listening melody measure (d ') suggest right hemisphere processing of melodies for both musicians and non-musicians. In contrast, the dual task measure suggests left hemisphere processing for the non-musicians and bilateral processing for the musicians. Both measures were collected from the same stimulus presentations and are therefore paradoxical particularly for the non-musicians. Irrespective of which task participants are primarily attending, both laterality measures should produce internally consistent patterns if they are measuring the same aspects of melody processing. Although the paradox for the musicians may be resolved by postulating an attentional bias towards the tapping task, no such explanation is possible for the non-musicians. In light of the paradoxical findings produced by these two measures, their utility for providing unambiguous information about lateralisation of mental processing is questionable.

Dual-Task Results and the Lateralization of Spatial Orientation: Artifact of Test Selection?

An investigation was conducted to identify the degree to which results regarding the lateralization of spatial orientation among men and women are artifacts of test selection. A dual-task design was used to study possible lateralization differences, providing baseline and dual-task measures of spatial-orientation performance, right- and left-hand tapping, and vocalization of “cat, dog, horse.” The Guilford-Zimmerman Test (Guilford & Zimmerman, 1953), the Eliot-Price Test (Eliot & Price, 1976), and the Stumpf-Fay Cube Perspectives Test (Stumpf & Fay, 1983) were the three spatial-orientation tests used to investigate possible artifacts of test selection. Twenty-eight right-handed male and 39 right-handed female undergraduates completed random baseline and dual-task sessions. Analyses indicated no significant sex-related differences in spatial-orientation ability for all three tests. Furthermore, there was no evidence of differential lateralization of spatial orientation between the sexes.

Do Individuals' Visual Recognition Thresholds Predict Performance on Concurrent Attitude Control Flight Tasks?

Two experiments tested near-threshold recognition performance throughout the visual field, examined the effect of the recognition task on a concurrent attitude tracking task, and tested whether individuals' near-threshold performance would predict their dual-task performance. In Experiment 1, an adaptive procedure measured the minimum viewing duration necessary for 75% performance in an aircraft classification task at various nonfoveal locations. Participants' critical tracking ability was also assessed using a central attitude display. Recognition deteriorated with eccentricity, and a wide distribution of recognition and tracking abilities was found. Experiment 2 combined the tasks; recognition was designated the primary task. Dual-task measures included the change in recognition accuracy and the increase in tracking error. Individuals' recognition thresholds (Experiment I) failed to predict their dual-task tracking performance (Experiment 2). Notably, viewers' critical tracking ability predicted their s...

Multivariate Evaluation of Workload, Resources, and Performance in Dual Task Data

The problems of evaluating dual and complex task experiments are discussed. Two methods are proposed that provide a metric for measuring and comparing performance and workload in such experiments. The first method is based on derivations of effect size measures, which provide a useful descriptive and a valid inferential tool for dealing with single task, dual task, and multiple response measure situations. The second method involves a new approach to empirical derivation of performance-resource functions. The method is straightforward and testable. Examples and illustrations are presented.

A comparison of single- and dual-task measures to predict simulator performance of beginning student pilots

An experiment comparing the predictive validity of single- versus dual-task measures is reported. Two identical one-dimensional tracking tasks were used in the experiment. One task was controlled by the subject's left hand and the other by his right. Fifty-seven men first received two trials on each of the tasks alone followed by 25 dual-task trials. Finally, they again performed each task alone for one trial. The subjects subsequently worked through a short basic flight course consisting of ground instruction and practice in a GAT-2 simulator. After completing the course, the subjects performances on four level turns, four descents, and four descents followed by stalls were scored. Performance in the simulator was correlated with performance on each tracking trial. The predictive validity of the early single-task scores decreased with practice while the dual-task validity increased throughout the testing session. However, the predictive validity of the late single-task scores was almost as large as that ...

A Comparison of the Predictive Validities of Single- and Dual-Task Measures

An experiment comparing the predictive validity of single-versus dual-task measures is reported. Fifty-seven males received two trials on each of two identical one-dimensional compensatory tracking tasks followed by 25 dual-task trials. Finally, they performed each task alone for one trial. The subjects then were given a short basic flight course consisting of ground instruction and practice in a GAT-2 simulator. After completing the course, the subjects performed four repetitions of three maneuvers. Performance in the simulator then was correlated with performance on each tracking trial. The predictive validity of the early single-task scores decreased with practice while the dual-task validity increased throughout the testing session. However, the predictive validity of the late single-task scores was almost as large as that of the late dual-task scores.

Dual-Task Measures of S-R Compatibility

The present study was designed to compare single-task and dual-task measures of S-R compatibility. A numeral-motor choice-reaction task was performed alone and with a secondary tracking task. The level of compatibility was varied by manipulating the S-R assignments in the choice-reaction task. Results of the single-task trials indicated that reaction time was significantly slower for the incompatible conditions. Reaction time was slower, more errors were made, and fewer problems were attempted in the incompatible dual-task trials. Despite instructions to maintain choice-reaction performance at single-task levels, incompatible task performance was significantly degraded in the dual-task setting. Results indicated that resistance to task-induced stress may be a major indicant of the level of compatibility.

Concurrent validation of a dual-task selection test.

Examined individual differences in dual-task decrement within the framework of a concurrent validation paradigm. The performance of 49 males employed as detection and communication equipment operators aboard military antisubmarine aircraft was measured in a dual-task situation, which combined a visual decision task and an auditory short-term memory task. Criterion scores from a standardized exercise in a radar training simulator were not significantly related to dual-task measures. Peer ratings, supervisor rank orderings based on flight performance, radar training grades, and indexes combining subjective and objective criteria were significantly related to dual-task measures. The dual-task measures, when combined with predictive measures available from aircrew selection tests, enhanced the potential predictive effectiveness. Keywords: Driver distraction; Language: en