Elsevier

Acta Psychologica

Volume 91, Issue 2, March 1996, Pages 175-206
Acta Psychologica

Viability of resource theories in explaining time-sharing performance

https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(94)00055-7Get rights and content

Abstract

The primary objective of the present research was to test for performance tradeoff induced by priority instructions with the purportedly unbiased optimum-maximum method. In Experiment 1, performance tradeoff was observed when the tracking task was optimized but not when the Sternberg memory task was optimized. It was hypothesized that the tracking task was protected by peripheral vision when subjects focused on the optimized memory task. The second experiment tested the generality of the results with additional variations of the task pairs selected to represent different degrees of shared resources. The extent of performance tradeoff and time-sharing efficiency varied systematically with the extent of predicted resource overlap between the time-shared tasks. The observed performance tradeoff was strongly indicative of subjects' voluntary allocation control. Further, subjective ratings suggested that such control was effortful. These results were supportive of multiple resource theories and the viability of resource explanation of task interference.

References (64)

  • C.W. Eriksen

    Attentional search of the visual field

  • C.D. Eriksen et al.

    Selective attention: Noise suppression or signal enhancement

    Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society

    (1972)
  • M.L. Fracker et al.

    Resources, confusions, and compatibility in dual-axis tracking: Displays, controls, and dynamics

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1989)
  • A. Friedman et al.

    Hemispheres as independent resources systems: Limited-capacity processing and cerebral specialization

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1981)
  • D. Gopher

    In defence of resources: On structures, energies, pools and the allocation of attention

  • D. Gopher

    The skill of attention control: Acquisition and execution of attention strategies

  • D. Gopher et al.

    On the psychophysics of workload: Why bother with subjective measures?

    Human Factors

    (1984)
  • D. Gopher et al.

    Different difficulty manipulations interact differently with task emphasis: Evidence for multiple resources

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1982)
  • W. Hirst et al.

    Characterizing attentional resources

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

    (1987)
  • J. Isreal et al.

    P300 and tracking difficulty: Evidence for a multiple capacity view of attention

    Psychophysiology

    (1980)
  • J. Isreal et al.

    The event-related brain potential as a selective index of display monitoring load

    Human Factors

    (1980)
  • R.J. Jagacinski

    A qualitative look at feedback control theory as a style of describing behavior

    Human Factors

    (1977)
  • D. Kahneman

    Attention and effort

    (1973)
  • R.A. Kinchla

    The measurement of attention

  • R.A. Kinchla

    Attention

    Annual Review of Psychology

    (1992)
  • H.W. Leibowitz et al.

    Implications of recent developments in dynamic spatial orientation and visual resolution for vehicle guidance

  • W.H. Levison

    A methodology for quantifying the effects of aging on perceptual-motor capability

    Human Factors

    (1981)
  • D. Manzey

    Workload assessment by secondary tasks and the multidimensionality of human information processing resources

  • P. McLeod

    A dual task response modality effect: Support for multiprocessor models of attention

    Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

    (1977)
  • N. Moray

    The strategic control of information processing

  • D. Navon

    Resources — A theoretical soup stone?

    Psychological Review

    (1984)
  • D. Navon

    Attention division or attention sharing?

  • Cited by (0)

    View full text