TY - JOUR A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Simultaneous cognitive operations in working memory after dual-task practice N2 - The authors tested the hypothesis that with adequate practice, people can execute 2 cognitive operations in working memory simultaneously. In Experiment 1, 6 students practiced updating 2 items in working memory through 2 sequences of operations (1 numerical, 1 spatial). In different blocks, imperative stimuli for the 2 sequences of operations were presented either simultaneously or sequentially. Initially, most participants experienced substantial dual-task costs. After 24 sessions of practice, operation latencies for simultaneous presentation were equal to the maximum of times for the 2 operations in the sequential condition, suggesting perfect timesharing. Experiment 2 showed that a reduction of dual-task costs requires practice on the combination of the 2 updating tasks, not just practice on each individual task. Hence, the reduction of dual-task costs cannot be explained by shortening or automatization of individual operations Y1 - 2004 SN - 0096-1523 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Göthe, Katrin A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Age differences in dual-task performance after practice N2 - This study investigated whether older adults could acquire the ability to perform 2 cognitive operations in parallel in a paradigm in which young adults had been shown to be able to do so (K. Oberauer & R. Kliegl, 2004). Twelve young and 12 older adults practiced a numerical and a visuospatial continuous memory updating task in single-task and dual-task conditions for 16 to 24 sessions. After practice, 9 young adults were able to process the 2 tasks without dual- task costs, but none of the older adults had reached the criterion of parallel processing. The results suggest a qualitative difference between young and older adults in how they approach dual-task situations. Y1 - 2008 UR - http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=browsePA.volumes&jcode=pag U6 - https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.22.3.596 SN - 0882-7974 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Rodriguez-Villagra, Odir Antonio A1 - Göthe, Katrin A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Working memory capacity in a go/no-go task - age differences in interference, processing speed, and attentional control JF - Developmental psychology N2 - We tested the limits of working-memory capacity (WMC) of young adults, old adults, and children with a memory-updating task. The task consisted of mentally shifting spatial positions within a grid according to arrows, their color signaling either only go (control) or go/no-go conditions. The interference model (IM) of Oberauer and Kliegl (2006) was simultaneously fitted to the data of all groups. In addition to the 3 main model parameters (feature overlap, noise, and processing rate), we estimated the time for switching between go and no-go steps as a new model parameter. In this study, we examined the IM parameters across the life span. The IM parameter estimates show that (a) conditions were not different in interference by feature overlap and interference by confusion; (b) switching costs time; (c) young adults and children were less susceptible than old adults to interference due to feature overlap; (d) noise was highest for children, followed by old and young adults; (e) old adults differed from children and young adults in lower processing rate; and (f) children and old adults had a larger switch cost between go steps and no-go steps. Thus, the results of this study indicated that across age, the IM parameters contribute distinctively for explaining the limits of WMC. KW - working memory capacity KW - interference model KW - inhibition KW - children KW - old adults and young adults Y1 - 2013 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030883 SN - 0012-1649 VL - 49 IS - 9 SP - 1683 EP - 1696 PB - American Psychological Association CY - Washington ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Interferenz im Arbeitsgedächtnis : ein formales Modell Y1 - 2010 UR - http://psycontent.metapress.com/content/0033-3042 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1026/0033-3042/a000008 SN - 0033-3042 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - A formal model of capacity limits in working memory JF - Journal of Memory and Language N2 - A mathematical model of working-memory capacity limits is proposed on the key assumption of mutual interference between items in working memory. Interference is assumed to arise from overwriting of features shared by these items. The model was fit to time-accuracy data of memory-updating tasks from four experiments using nonlinear mixed effect (NLME) models as a framework. The model gave a good account of the data from a numerical and a spatial task version. The performance pattern in a combination of numerical and spatial updating could be explained by variations in the interference parameter: assuming less feature overlap between contents from different domains than between contents from the same domain, the model can account for double dissociations of content domains in dual-task experiments. Experiment 3 extended this idea to similarity within the verbal domain. The decline of memory accuracy with increasing memory load was steeper with phonologically similar than with dissimilar material, although processing speed was faster for the similar material. The model captured the similarity effects with a higher estimated interference parameter for the similar than for the dissimilar condition. The results are difficult to explain with alternative models, in particular models incorporating time-based decay and models assuming limited resource pools. KW - working memory KW - interference KW - capacity KW - mathematical model KW - non-linear mixed effects Y1 - 2006 UR - http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/0749596X U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.009 SN - 0749-596X VL - 55 IS - 4 SP - 601 EP - 626 PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Jünger, Elisabeth A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold A1 - Oberauer, Klaus T1 - No evidence for feature overwriting in visual working memory JF - Memory Y1 - 2014 SN - 0965-8211 SN - 1464-0686 VL - 22 IS - 4 SP - 374 EP - 389 PB - Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group CY - Abingdon ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Göthe, Katrin A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Eliminating dual-task costs by minimizing crosstalk between tasks: The role of modality and feature pairings JF - Cognition : international journal of cognitive science N2 - We tested the independent influences of two content-based factors on dual-task costs, and on the parallel processing ability: The pairing of S-R modalities and the pairing of relevant features between stimuli and responses of two tasks. The two pairing factors were realized across four dual-task groups. Within each group the two tasks comprised two different stimulus modalities (visual and auditory), two different relevant stimulus features (spatial and verbal) and two response modalities (manual and vocal). Pairings of S-R modalities (standard: visual-manual and auditory-vocal, non-standard: visual-vocal and auditory manual) and feature pairings (standard: spatial-manual and verbal-vocal, non-standard: spatial-vocal and verbal-manual) varied across groups. All participants practiced their respective dual-task combination in a paradigm with simultaneous stimulus onset before being transferred to a psychological refractory period paradigm varying stimulus-onset asynchrony. A comparison at the end of practice revealed similar dual-task costs and similar pairing effects in both paradigms. Dual-task costs depended on modality and feature pairings. Groups training with non-standard feature pairings (i.e., verbal stimulus features mapped to spatially separated response keys, or spatial stimulus features mapped to verbal responses) and non-standard modality pairings (i.e., auditory stimulus mapped to manual response, or visual stimulus mapped to vocal responses) had higher dual-task costs than respective standard pairings. In contrast, irrespective of modality pairing dual-task costs virtually disappeared with standard feature pairings after practice in both paradigms. The results can be explained by crosstalk between feature-binding processes for the two tasks. Crosstalk was present for non-standard but absent for standard feature pairings. Therefore, standard feature pairings enabled parallel processing at the end of practice. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. KW - Parallel processing KW - Modality pairings KW - Representational overlap KW - Bottleneck Y1 - 2016 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.02.003 SN - 0010-0277 SN - 1873-7838 VL - 150 SP - 92 EP - 108 PB - Elsevier CY - Amsterdam ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Beyond resources : formal models of complexity effects in age differences in working memory Y1 - 2001 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Oberauer, Klaus A1 - Demmrich, Anke A1 - Mayr, Ulrich A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold T1 - Dissociating retention and access in working memory : an age-comparative study of mental arithmetic Y1 - 2001 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Kliegl, Reinhold A1 - Mayr, Ulrich A1 - Oberauer, Klaus T1 - Resource limitations and process dissociations in individual differences research Y1 - 2000 ER -