Visual attention is required for multiple object tracking

How do visual, auditory and motor dual-tasking each affect swallowing and chewing function?

BACKGROUND

It can be challenging to perform a second task at the same time as swallowing.

OBJECTIVE(S)

The study aimed to investigate the effect of visual, auditory and motor dual-tasking on swallowing and chewing function in healthy young adults.

METHOD

Right-handed healthy adults without any psychological and cognitive problems were included in the study. Swallowing was evaluated based on the dysphagia limit in different liquid textures such as water and nectar consistencies, and chewing was evaluated by the Test of Masticating and Swallowing Solids. For the second task, visual and auditory performance was assessed using reaction time, and the motor performance was assessed using a bilateral tapping task. Assessments were performed in two steps: baseline and dual-task. For baseline, all evaluation methods were applied individually. After completing the baseline assessment, dual-task assessment were carried out the following day. For dual-task assessment, the swallowing and chewing tasks were performed simultaneously with visual, auditory and motor tasks.

RESULTS

Results showed a significant decrease in dysphagia limit in the nectar consistency, and significant increase in chewing time, visual reaction time and tapping rate (right-left) when compared to baseline and dual-task conditions (χ2(3) = 9.61, p = .02; χ2(3) = 9.02, p = .02; χ2(3) = 28.09, p < .001; χ2(3) = 28.97, p < .001; χ2(3) = 21.56, p < .001, respectively). However, there were no differences in dysphagia limit in the water and auditory reaction time compared to baseline and dual-task conditions (χ2(3) = 3.18, p = .36; χ2(3) = 2.56, p = .50, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Results shedding light on how simultaneous dual tasks can influence swallowing and chewing. Dual-tasking cause a decrease in both swallowing/chewing and the visual/motor performances. These results may provide valuable information for designing interventions or strategies aimed at improving or maintaining optimal swallowing and chewing during in various populations during daily life.

Influences of active control on attention allocation in MOT

We investigated the influence of active involvement on the way visual attention is distributed during multiple-object tracking (MOT), specifically when objects bounce, using two experiments modeled after the videogame Pong. In both experiments, participants were either assigned to an active group or a passive group. The active groups were instructed to move a virtual paddle in order to bounce target objects as often as possible. Participants in the passive groups viewed recordings of trials from the active groups. In all conditions, participants were asked to track the target objects and to detect dot probes that briefly appeared on the screen. Using probe detection, we explored the distribution of attentional resources over the linear and bounce trajectories of tracked objects. We found that active involvement can enhance probe detection along the future post-bounce trajectory, but it depends on the difficulty of the task.

Attentional capture in multiple object tracking

Attentional processes are generally assumed to be involved in multiple object tracking (MOT). The attentional capture paradigm is regularly used to study conditions of attentional control. It has up to now not been used to assess influences of sudden onset distractor stimuli in MOT. We investigated whether attentional capture does occur in MOT: Are onset distractors processed at all in dynamic attentional tasks? We found that sudden onset distractors were effective in lowering probe detection, thus demonstrating attentional capture. Tracking performance as dependent measure was not affected. The attentional capture effect persisted in conditions of higher tracking load (Experiment 2) and was dramatically increased in lower presentation frequency of the onset distractor (Experiment 3). Tracking performance was shown to suffer only when onset distractors were presented serially with very short time gaps in between, thus effectively disturbing re-engaging attention on the tracking set (Experiment 4). We discuss that rapid dis- and re-engagement of the attention process on target objects and an additional more basic process that continuously provides location information allow managing strong disruptions of attention during tracking.