Short Article: Sequential Tapping Interferes Selectively with Multiple-Object Tracking: Do Finger-Tapping and Tracking Share a Common Resource?

Abstract

Multiple-object tracking involves simultaneously monitoring positions of a number of target items as they move among distractors. Young adults are capable of tracking only 3–5 items at once. In this study we investigated the origin of this limitation by looking for secondary tasks that interfere with tracking. We compared tracking performance (baseline condition), with performance when participants tapped three fingers in a specific order while tracking (sequential tapping) or articulated three syllables in a specific order while tracking (sequential articulation). The articulation task was used to ensure that the interference produced by sequential tapping was more than would be expected by the executive demands of carrying out any two “attention-demanding” tasks at once. Even though sequential tapping does not require vision or memorizing the positions of external items, it produced significantly more interference than did sequential articulation, as might be expected if tracking and sequential tapping shared a common (limited) resource.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bahrami

(2003). Object property encoding and change blindness in multiple object tracking. Visual Cognition 10, 949–963.

Culham

J. C.

Brandt

S. A.

Cavanagh

Kanwisher

N. G.

Dale

A. M.

Tootell

R. B.

(1998). Cortical fMRI activation produced by attentive tracking of moving targets. Journal of Neurophysiology 80, 2657–2670.

Della Sala

Gray

Baddeley

Allamano

Wilson

(1999). Pattern span: A tool for unwelding visuo-spatial memory. Neuropsychologia 37, 1189–1199.

Freund

J. E.

(1981). Statistics: A first course. (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Horowitz

T. S.

Holcombe

A. O.

Wolfe

J. M.

Arsenio

H. C.

DiMase

J. S.

(2004). Attentional pursuit is faster than attentional saccade. Journal of Vision 4, 585–560.

Logie

R. H.

(1995). Visuo-spatial processing in working memory Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.

Pearson

D. G.

Sahraie

(2003). Oculomotor control and the maintenance of spatially and temporally distributed events in visuo-spatial working memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 56A, 1089–1111.

Pylyshyn

(2001). Visual indexes, preconceptual objects, and situated vision. Cognition 80, 127–158.

Pylyshyn

(2004). Some puzzling findings in multiple object tracking: I. Tracking without keeping track of object identities. Visual Cognition 11, 801–822.

10.

Smyth

M. M.

Scholey

K. A.

(1994). Interference in immediate spatial memory. Memory & Cognition 22, 1–13.

11.

Tremblay

Jones

D. M.

(1998). Role of habituation in the irrelevant sound effect: Evidence from the effects of token set size and rate of transition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 24, 659–671.

12.

Trick

L. M.

Hollinsworth

Brodeur

D. A.

(2006). Multiple-object tracking across the lifespan: The role of short-term memory as it relates to the ability to select and report target positions. Manuscript submitted for publication.

13.

Trick

L. M.

Jaspers-Fayer

Sethi

(2005). Multiple-object tracking in children: The “Catch the Spies” task. Cognitive Development 20, 373–387.

14.

Vandierendonck

Kemps

Fastame

Szmalec

(2004). Working memory components of the Corsi blocks task. British Journal of Psychology 95, 57–59.

15.

Wheeler

M. E.

Treisman

A. M.

(2002). Binding in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 131, 48–64.

16.

Zimmer

H. D.

Speiser

H. R.

Seidler

(2003). Spatio-temporal working-memory and short-term object-location tasks use different memory mechanisms. Acta Psychologica 114, 41–65.