Embodied cognition in multitasking: increased hand-specific task shielding when stimuli are presented near the hand

Prospective reward in dual task induces a bias towards action at the cost of less accurate Task 2 performance

In dual tasks, with a visual-manual choice reaction time task in Task 1 and a go/no-go task in Task 2, not responding to Task 2 can have adverse effects on Task 1 performance, as demonstrated by no-go backward crosstalk effects (no-go BCE). Here, the response inhibition required to not respond to Task 2 spills over and slows response execution in Task 1. Over three experiments, we investigated whether the prospect of reward, which is a potent cognitive control modulator, influences no-go BCE. In Experiment 1, reward for fast and accurate responses in both tasks was modulated as a within-subject factor, and in Experiments 2 and 3, as a between-subject factor. The results revealed three major insights. In all three experiments, reward led to faster Task 1 and Task 2 performance. Second, despite this speeding, the no-go BCE was not modulated by reward. Finally, the reward led to more errors in Task 2 no-go trials. These results reveal a reward-induced bias for action, suggesting better preparedness to respond and, consequently, larger commission errors in Task 2 no-go trials. The absence of a reward-based modulation of the no-go BCE indicates that the reward-induced bias for action does not necessarily translate into larger response inhibition. These findings point towards the complex interactions between reward and inhibitory control and shed light on the potentials and limitations of reward-based modulation of dual-task interference.

Opposing influences of global and local stimulus-hand proximity on crosstalk interference in dual tasks

In contrast to traditional dualistic views of cognition, visual stimulus processing appears not independent of bodily factors such as hand positioning. For example, reduced crosstalk between two temporally overlapping tasks has been observed when the hands are moved into the attentional window alongside their respective stimuli (i.e., establishing global stimulus-hand proximity). This result indicates that hand-specific attentional processing enhancements support a more serial rather than parallel processing of the two tasks. To further elucidate the nature of these processing modulations and their effect on multitasking performance, the present study consisted of three interrelated crosstalk experiments. Experiment 1 manipulated global stimulus-hand proximity and stimulus-effect proximity orthogonally, with results demonstrating that hand proximity rather than effect proximity drives the crosstalk reduction. Experiment 2 manipulated the physical distance between both hands (i.e., varying local stimulus-hand proximity), with results showing weak evidence of increased crosstalk when both hands are close to each other. Experiment 3 tested opposing influences of global and local stimulus-hand proximity as observed in Experiment 1 and 2 rigorously within one experiment, by employing an orthogonal manipulation of these two proximity measures. Again, we observed slightly increased crosstalk for hands close to each other (replicating Experiment 2); however, in contrast to Experiment 1, the effect of global stimulus-hand proximity on the observed crosstalk was not significant this time. Taken together, the experiments support the notion of hand-specific modulations of perception-action coupling, which can either lead to more or less interference in multitasking, depending on the exact arrangement of hands and stimuli.

The effect of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) on cognitive control in multitasking

Current research in brain stimulation suggests transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) as a promising tool to modulate cognitive functions in healthy populations, such as attention, memory, and executive functions. Empirical evidence in single-task contexts, suggests that taVNS promotes holistic task processing, which strengthens the integration of multiple stimulus features in task processing. However, it is unclear how taVNS might affect performance in multitasking, where the integration of multiple stimuli leads to an overlap in stimulus response translation processes, increasing the risk of between-task interference (crosstalk). In a single-blinded, sham-controlled, within-subject design, participants underwent taVNS while performing a dual task. To assess the effects of taVNS, behavioral (reaction times), physiological (heart rate variability, salivary alpha-amylase), and subjective psychological variables (e.g., arousal) were recorded over three cognitive test blocks. Our results revealed no overall significant effect of taVNS on physiological and subjective psychological variables. However, the results showed a significant increase in between-task interference under taVNS in the first test block, but not in the subsequent test blocks. Our findings therefore suggest that taVNS increased integrative processing of both tasks early during active stimulation.

Valence moderates the effect of stimulus-hand proximity on conflict processing and gaze-cueing

An effective interaction with the environment requires adaptation of one's own behaviour to environmental demands. We do so by using cues from our environment and relating these cues to our body to predict the outcomes of events. The recent literature on embodied cognition suggests that task-relevant stimuli, presented near the hands, receive more attentional capacity and are processed differently than stimuli, presented spatially more distant to our body. It has also been proposed that near-hand processing is beneficial to conflict resolution. In the current study, we tested the assumption of an attentional bias towards the near hand space in the context of our previous work by combining a cueing paradigm (allocation of visual attention) with a conflict processing paradigm (Simon task) in the near vs far hand space. In addition, the relevance of processing was manipulated by using affective (angry vs neutral smileys) gaze cues (i.e., varying the valence of the cues). Our results indicate that (a) the interaction of valence × cue congruency × hand proximity was significant, indicating that the cueing effect was larger for negative valence in the proximal condition. (b) The interaction of valence × Simon compatibility × stimulus-hand proximity interaction was significant, indicating that for negative valence processing, the Simon effect was smaller in the proximal than in the distal stimulus-hand condition. This effect was at least numerically but not significantly reversed in the neutral valence condition. (c) Overall, cue congruency, indicating the correct vs incorrect attention allocation to the target stimulus onset, did not reveal any effect on Simon compatibility × stimulus-hand proximity. Our results suggest that valence, the allocation of attention, and conflict, seem to be decisive factors determining the direction and strength of hand proximity effects.

Two types of between-task conflict trigger respective processing adjustments within one dual-task

In dual tasking, two different kinds of between-task conflict occur. Because in both cases, Task 2 characteristics affect Task 1 performance, they are commonly referred to as backward crosstalk effects (BCE): One with a conflict at the response selection stage when Task 1 and Task 2 have dimensional overlap (the compatibility-based BCE) and one with a conflict at the motor execution stage when response inhibition resulting from a Task 2 no-go-trial interferes with simultaneous response execution in Task 1 (the no-go BCE). Recent research suggests that these BCEs differ not only in their underlying cognitive processes, but also in how cognitive control is regulated. Here, we investigated whether both can be produced in a single dual-task set up and whether they trigger their respective processing adjustments (i.e., a sequential modulation). In three experiments, participants categorized numbers as smaller or larger than 5 in Task 1. In Experiments 1 and 2, numbers were responded to irrespective of numerical size (go-response) as Task 2. Further, dimensional overlap was provided by (non)corresponding size information in both stimuli, which was strengthened in Experiment 2 by presenting S1 and S2 in the same/different color in compatible/incompatible trials, respectively. In Experiment 3, participants were required to perform a number-size categorization also in Task 2, establishing strong dimensional overlap by activating the same or different response categories in both tasks. In all three experiments, the number 5 served as the no-go stimulus in Task 2 to induce a no-go BCE on Task 1. By and large, our results show that both types of between-task conflicts not only occur within the same type of BCE, but they also trigger their respective sequential modulation.