Effects of interpolating a secondary task during the intertrial interval of a concept identification problem

Raymond M. White, John R. Woods, William Wozniak

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Several tasks were interpolated during the intertrial interval (ITI) of a concept identification (CI) task. In Experiment I, 234 subjects were required to count backwards by threes, emit a sibilant, or to refrain from thinking after all responses, after correct responses, or after errors. Counting backwards interfered with performance, but only if it occurred after errors. Stimulus and feedback information was either withheld, as in Experiment I, or made available during the ITI in Experiment II. Results of the data from 280 subjects indicated that counting backwards interfered with performance only when interpolated after errors, when stimulus-feedback information was withheld, but had an equivalent effect after errors and correct responses when stimulus-feedback information was available during ITI, indicating that different strategies were induced by the presence of such information.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)648-652
Number of pages5
JournalMemory & Cognition
Volume3
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 1975

Fingerprint

Stimulus
Experiment
Sibilants

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Effects of interpolating a secondary task during the intertrial interval of a concept identification problem. / White, Raymond M.; Woods, John R.; Wozniak, William.

In: Memory & Cognition, Vol. 3, No. 6, 01.11.1975, p. 648-652.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{01d921fd6cfd4893a7cf530ed56d09d8,
title = "Effects of interpolating a secondary task during the intertrial interval of a concept identification problem",
abstract = "Several tasks were interpolated during the intertrial interval (ITI) of a concept identification (CI) task. In Experiment I, 234 subjects were required to count backwards by threes, emit a sibilant, or to refrain from thinking after all responses, after correct responses, or after errors. Counting backwards interfered with performance, but only if it occurred after errors. Stimulus and feedback information was either withheld, as in Experiment I, or made available during the ITI in Experiment II. Results of the data from 280 subjects indicated that counting backwards interfered with performance only when interpolated after errors, when stimulus-feedback information was withheld, but had an equivalent effect after errors and correct responses when stimulus-feedback information was available during ITI, indicating that different strategies were induced by the presence of such information.",
author = "White, {Raymond M.} and Woods, {John R.} and William Wozniak",
year = "1975",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3758/BF03198230",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "3",
pages = "648--652",
journal = "Memory and Cognition",
issn = "0090-502X",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of interpolating a secondary task during the intertrial interval of a concept identification problem

AU - White, Raymond M.

AU - Woods, John R.

AU - Wozniak, William

PY - 1975/11/1

Y1 - 1975/11/1

N2 - Several tasks were interpolated during the intertrial interval (ITI) of a concept identification (CI) task. In Experiment I, 234 subjects were required to count backwards by threes, emit a sibilant, or to refrain from thinking after all responses, after correct responses, or after errors. Counting backwards interfered with performance, but only if it occurred after errors. Stimulus and feedback information was either withheld, as in Experiment I, or made available during the ITI in Experiment II. Results of the data from 280 subjects indicated that counting backwards interfered with performance only when interpolated after errors, when stimulus-feedback information was withheld, but had an equivalent effect after errors and correct responses when stimulus-feedback information was available during ITI, indicating that different strategies were induced by the presence of such information.

AB - Several tasks were interpolated during the intertrial interval (ITI) of a concept identification (CI) task. In Experiment I, 234 subjects were required to count backwards by threes, emit a sibilant, or to refrain from thinking after all responses, after correct responses, or after errors. Counting backwards interfered with performance, but only if it occurred after errors. Stimulus and feedback information was either withheld, as in Experiment I, or made available during the ITI in Experiment II. Results of the data from 280 subjects indicated that counting backwards interfered with performance only when interpolated after errors, when stimulus-feedback information was withheld, but had an equivalent effect after errors and correct responses when stimulus-feedback information was available during ITI, indicating that different strategies were induced by the presence of such information.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0016710216&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0016710216&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3758/BF03198230

DO - 10.3758/BF03198230

M3 - Article

C2 - 24203906

AN - SCOPUS:0016710216

VL - 3

SP - 648

EP - 652

JO - Memory and Cognition

JF - Memory and Cognition

SN - 0090-502X

IS - 6

ER -