CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 280Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismMultisensory perception and integration

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dependence and independence in responding to double stimulation: A comparison of stop, change, and dual-task paradigms.

Logan, Gordon D., Burkell, Jacqueline·1986·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
DOI 10.1037/0096-1523.12.4.549
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

When a letter and a tone are presented in rapid succession, there is substantial interference if both require an overt response (the dual-task paradigm), but there is very little interference if the tone is a signal to inhibit the response to the letter (the slopping paradigm). These effects were replicated under common stimulus conditions in two experiments, and they were compared with effects in a change paradigm, in which the tone required an overt response, like the dual-task paradigm, but was also a signal to inhibit the response to the letter, like the stopping paradigm. In the change paradigm, the overt response to the tone suffered interference only if subjects failed to inhibit the concurrent response to the letter; inhibiting the response to the letter virtually eliminated the interference. The results suggest that differences in response competition are primarily responsible for differences in interference between the dual-task and stopping paradigms. More generally, the results support response-competition interpretations of dual-task interference. In a typical dual-task experiment, people are presented with two stimuli in rapid succession and are required to respond to each stimulus as quickly as possible. Typically, there is substantial interference between the two tasks, particularly when the

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-1523.12.4.549

Cites

38 of 38 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 280

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Logan, G. D., & Burkell, J.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
ORCID
Logan, Gordon D.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1986
Volume
12
Issue
4
Pages
549-563
ISSN
  • 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1277
DOI
10.1037/0096-1523.12.4.549
OpenAlex
W1971052805
Cited by
280
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 16
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (8510365)
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
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 › Multisensory perception and integration
Keywords
dual-task interference, response competition, response inhibition, response-dependence, overt response

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