CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 112Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismCognitive Functions and Memory

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interference between two concurrent tasks is associated with activation of overlapping fields in the cortex

Klingberg, Torkel, Roland, Per E·1997·Cognitive Brain Research
DOI 10.1016/s0926-6410(97)00010-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Interference between two concurrent tasks can be measured as an increased reaction time during simultaneous performance compared to when each task is performed alone. We tested the hypothesis that two tasks interfere because they require activation of overlapping areas of the cerebral cortex. With positron emission tomography we measured cortical activation as fields with significant increase in regional cerebral blood flow during single task performance of an auditory and a visual go/no-go task and an auditory and a visual short-term memory (STM) task. In a separate experiment we measured the degree of interference between the two go/no-go tasks and between the two STM tasks during dual task performance. Both the two go/no-go tasks and the two STM tasks activated overlapping parts of the cortex and interfered significantly during dual task performance. The two STM tasks had a larger volume of overlap and also significantly larger increase in reaction time during dual task performance, compared to the go/no-go tasks. The results thus indicate that two concurrent tasks interfere, with a resulting increase in reaction time, if they require activation of overlapping parts of the cortex.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0926-6410(97)00010-4

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. A. Baddeley, Working Memory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1986.
  2. P.E. Roland, Brain Activation, Wiley-Liss, New York, 1993.
  3. C.D. Wickens, The structure of attentional resources, in: R. Nickerson (Ed.), Attention and Performance VIII, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1980.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 112

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Klingberg, T., & Roland, P. E.
Affiliations
Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Corresponding author
Klingberg, Torkel
ORCID
Venue
Cognitive Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-07
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
1-8
ISSN
0926-6410 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0926-6410(97)00010-4
OpenAlex
W2015155554
Cited by
111
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Cognitive Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
task interference, dual-task performance, regional cerebral blood flow, go/no-go task, short-term memory, reaction time
MeSH terms
Adult, Cerebral Cortex, Cerebrovascular Circulation, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Photic Stimulation, Psychomotor Performance, Psychophysics, Reaction Time, Tomography, Emission-Computed, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review