Bratzke Daniel, Ulrich Rolf, Rolke Bettina, Schröter Hannes, Jentzsch Ines, Leuthold Hartmut
Psychologisches Institut, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008 Sep;61(9):1385-99. doi: 10.1080/17470210701536856.
According to the extended bottleneck model, dual-task interference does not arise only from a central bottleneck but also from processing limitations at the motor stage. Evidence for this assumption has previously been found only for same-effector tasks but not for different-effector tasks. In order to examine the existence of motor interference with different effectors, we used the psychological refractory period paradigm and employed response sequences of different length in Task 1 (R1 sequence length). Experiment 1 incorporated vocal response sequences in Task 1 and a manual response in Task 2. In Experiment 2, the assignment of the effectors to the two tasks was reversed. In both experiments, the long R1 sequence prolonged reaction time for Task 2 (RT2), and this effect was reduced with decreasing temporal overlap of the two tasks. Thus, the present experiments demonstrate motor interference between different-effector tasks. This interference may be due to on-line programming or to central response monitoring.
根据扩展瓶颈模型，双任务干扰不仅源于中央瓶颈，还源于运动阶段的加工限制。此前，这一假设的证据仅在同效应器任务中被发现，而在不同效应器任务中未被发现。为了检验不同效应器之间运动干扰的存在，我们采用了心理不应期范式，并在任务1中使用了不同长度的反应序列（R1序列长度）。实验1在任务1中采用语音反应序列，在任务2中采用手动反应。在实验2中，两个任务的效应器分配进行了反转。在两个实验中，较长的R1序列延长了任务2的反应时间（RT2），并且随着两个任务时间重叠的减少，这种效应减弱。因此，本实验证明了不同效应器任务之间存在运动干扰。这种干扰可能是由于在线编程或中央反应监测所致。
