The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Compatibility and Resource Competition between Modalities of Input, Central Processing, and Output
Abstract
Synthesized auditory displays and speech recognizers were used in two experiments to develop guidelines for their implementation in military aircraft. In the first experiment, the competition between encoding and response modalities of concurrent tasks was examined. The memory search task was more susceptible to competition for visual encoding, whereas the tracking task bore the greater impact from shared manual responding. The second experiment examined competition between tasks for encoding and response modalities and the optimum assignment of modalities to a given task. A simulated flight task was performed concurrently with either a spatial task (target acquisition) or a verbal task (memory). Best performance and least interference with the flight task were obtained when the spatial task was displayed visually and responded to manually and also when the verbal task was displayed auditorily and responded to with speech.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)60452-1 · Cited by 9,860
On data-limited and resource-limited processes
Norman, D. A., & Bobrow, D. G. (1975) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-3 · Cited by 2,403
S-R compatibility: spatial characteristics of stimulus and response codes.
Fitts, P. M., & Seeger, C. M. (1953) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0062827 · Cited by 1,088
Cited by
Multiple resources and performance prediction
Wickens, C. D. (2002) · Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science · doi:10.1080/14639220210123806 · Cited by 2,621
Self-citationMultiple Resources and Mental Workload
Wickens, C. D. (2008) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872008x288394 · Cited by 2,164
Self-citationDimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility-a model and taxonomy
Kornblum, S., Hasbroucq, T., & Osman, A. (1990) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.2.253 · Cited by 1,970
Perceptual load as a major determinant of the locus of selection in visual attention
Lavie, N., & Tsal, Y. (1994) · Perception & Psychophysics · doi:10.3758/bf03213897 · Cited by 870
Oviatt, S. (2007) · Human Factors and Ergonomics · doi:10.1201/9781410615862.ch21 · Cited by 485
Metadata
- Authors
- Wickens, C. D., Sandry, D. L., & Vidulich, M.
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1983-04
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 227-248
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W1612857394
- Cited by
- 402
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 18.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Compatibility and Resource Competition between Modalities of Input, Central Processing, and Output. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/001872088302500209
- The paper
- Wickens, C. D., Sandry, D. L., & Vidulich, M. (1983). Compatibility and Resource Competition between Modalities of Input, Central Processing, and Output. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088302500209
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.