Offers a look at dual-task interference and states that our minds
simply won't let us perform certain activities at the same time.
Explanation for why some people can't walk and chew gum at the same time;
Confirmation by Harold Pashler; Cognitive limitations; Important
implications for the understanding of attention.
By
PT Staff, published on September 01, 1992
The Gerald Ford Factor
IF YOU CAN'T WALK AND chew gum at the same time, science now serves
up an explanation-dual-task interference. Our minds simply won't let us
perform certain activities at the same time. No matter how simple.
Ever since 1940, it's been dear that two separate tasks calling for
different responses could trip up ordinary mortals. One task might be
labeling an object; the other, pushing a button depending on a sound's
pitch. Researchers posited a "bottleneck"-the subject's response to the
second task was upheld until the response to the first task was selected.
No amount of practice could abolish the interference between responses,
labeled the "psychological refractory effect." Unfortunately, until
recently, psychologists upheld a response to this theory.
Enter Harold Pashler, Ph.D., associate professor of psychology at
the University of California at San Diego. He has confirmed that when
presented with two different tasks, we hold off our second response until
the first response is chosen-regardless of whether or not the second
stimulus is present. So expect problems the first time you walk and chew
gum. You have to select walking before you can chew.
Why do we have such a hard time choosing responses to trivial
tasks? Says Pashler, it's about our cognitive limitations. When we have
to figure out a response, there's a delay. So how can you drive a car
while debating politics?
Most of us no longer think about driving-it's " automatic," a
series of preplanned actions. And the most complex are spaced out,
tending to fall at the beginning and end of your trip-when there are, in
fact, usually conversation lapses.
For Pashler, the evidence has important implications for the
understanding of attention, or how people select for further processing
one stimulus from the barrage of sensory inputs at any one time.
Selecting and responding are two different things, and recent evidence
suggests they are accomplished via different neural networks
The bottom line: When expected to perform two tasks, don't bother
starting on the second before you've performed your first. And in the
meantime, stay clear of first-time drivers looking for political
debates.
Tags:
1940,
associate professor,
attention,
barrage,
cognition,
cognitive limitations,
dual task,
first response,
gerald ford,
gum,
hard time,
interference,
mortals,
responses,
sensory inputs,
stimuli,
stimulus,
task,
time science,
trivial tasks,
university of california,
university of california at san diego
