Serial vs parallel processing psychology




















On the cognitive process level, the extent of serial task processing might be then translated into two aspects, i.

In addition to the top-down regulation, there is evidence for context-driven shifts between more parallel versus more serial dual-task processing.

For example, the aforementioned expectation of the temporal overlap between two tasks Miller et al. Recently, we also provided evidence for a complete bottom-up adjustment of parallel versus serial processing Fischer et al. The extent of serial processing was significantly increased for the location with high likelihood of crosstalk interference, which resulted in reduced crosstalk for trials at that location.

In trials presented at the location with low interference likelihood, shielding was reduced and higher levels of parallel processing were observed. Therefore, if a context requires more protection of T1 processing from T2 influences, task shielding is increased, resulting in less parallel processing. Studying impacting factors of additional task performance on prioritized motor movements, we demonstrated that the preceding trial history i.

Using continuous motor-execution tasks i. Such sequential modulations are typically accounted for by response conflicts triggering the recruitment of cognitive control Gratton et al.

In the dual-task context, this reflects a bias toward increased serial task processing to reduce crosstalk interference. First, we administered a mood-induction procedure with controlled arousal effects prior to a dual task with crosstalk. Participants that underwent a negative mood-induction protocol displayed higher levels of serial task processing e.

Second, we manipulated the level of parallel versus serial processing by activating different cognitive control states prior to dual-task performance Fischer and Hommel, Participants solved different types of creativity tasks associated with either cognitive flexibility i. In the convergent-thinking group, participants performed an adapted version of the remote association test RAT; Mednick, , in the divergent-thinking group, participants performed a version of the alternative uses task AUT; Guilford, in order to induce convergent versus divergent thinking, respectively.

The convergent-thinking group displayed stronger serial processing to reduce between-task interference compared to both divergent-thinking and control group.

Third, we investigated the effect of acute stress on dual-task processing modes. Following an acute psychosocial stressor Trier Social Stress Test , participants adopted a more resource-saving processing strategy of increased parallel processing compared to controls without the stress experience Plessow et al.

Stressed participants allowed for increased levels of between-task interference, presumably because a strict sequential and serial scheduling of task processing would be too effortful and resource-demanding. We interpreted our finding as a sacrificing and compensatory strategy in order to maintain overall high dual-task performance. The notion that parallel processing reflects a more resource-saving processing mode and is mentally less demanding Lehle et al.

Using a different dual-task paradigm consisting of two independent tasks without the possibility of between-task interactions, stress-related compensatory strategy shifts entailed an increased T1 priority focus, speeding T1 component processing and, as a result, reducing critical bottleneck stage processing Beste et al.

These examples illustrate that the adoption of a more parallel or a more serial task-processing mode largely depends on the conditions under which multiple tasks are performed. With this, the situation-dependent implementation of complementary task-processing modes in multitasking can be integrated into a general framework posting the regulation of cognitive control as fundamental basis underlying adaptive goal-directed behavior Cohen et al.

Adaptive action control requires the dynamic adjustment between complementary control demands. While task-irrelevant stimuli need to be ignored and blocked from being processed in order to prevent interference with task-relevant processing goal shielding , complete shielding is dysfunctional and even potentially harmful, as it would prevent the individual from monitoring the environment for potentially relevant stimuli background monitoring that may signal a change in action goal e.

Instead, a dynamic regulation of these complementary control processes is required, reflecting a tradeoff between antagonistic constraints see Goschke, , ; Goschke and Bolte, , for an overview. A recent argument is that dysfunctional control parameter settings in terms of sustained biases toward one particular often extreme control state might represent an endophenotype of a variety of mental disorders e. Such extreme biases and their behavioral consequences have been primarily investigated in healthy populations.

For example, an experimentally induced bias toward high stability comes at the cost of reduced cognitive flexibility Dreisbach and Goschke, ; Plessow et al. A key future scientific endeavor will be to determine the cognitive mechanisms that underlie the flexible adoption of complementary task-processing modes in general. Applying this framework, multitasking in itself constitutes a prime control dilemma, in which a crosstalk-avoiding serial processing strategy counters an effort-saving parallel processing strategy.

Complete T1 shielding and thus T2 blocking is dysfunctional, as successful multitasking requires the attendance and processing of T2 components. Yet, the efficiency of adaptive multitasking might be seen in the flexible selection of a situation-adequate processing strategy within a continuum from serial to parallel task processing. Such a conception also has direct consequences for defining efficient multitasking, and it raises the question of how to optimize the flexible and context-sensitive adoption of complementary task-processing modes.

We would like to conclude this discussion about parallel and serial processing in multitasking by emphasizing that the inclusion of closely related topics into further investigations of multitasking will be crucial as additional source to inform our understanding of efficient multitasking and its underlying cognitive processes. First of all, incorporating an individual difference perspective on multitasking ability in general and the adaptive adjustment of task-processing strategies in particular might hold promise for gaining novel insights into factors of optimized multitasking performance.

For example, individuals frequently engaging in multitasking are not necessarily the ones displaying efficient multitasking performance Ophir et al. In fact, multitasking activity correlated negatively with multitasking ability but positively with impulsiveness and sensation seeking Sanbonmatsu et al.

Individuals that frequently multitask e. In the context of the outlined discussion, this behavior can be framed as a task-processing bias continuously tuned toward heightened levels of parallel processing. Their ability has been explained in terms of a more efficient recruitment of cognitive control and an increased ability to maintain and coordinate multiple goals and limitations in information processing, enabling supertaskers to more effectively deal with situations of heightened cognitive load Medeiros-Ward et al.

Secondly, research contrasting tentative processes underlying multitasking with analogous processes in related fields of the study of attentional limitations, e. To illustrate this point, unified bottleneck theories propose close similarities between attentional limitations in sensory consolidation as in the attentional blink Raymond et al.

Yet, while PRP research often aims at optimizing dual-task performance by increasing the engagement of cognitive control e. Therefore, future research is needed to determine whether strategies of increasing versus decreasing the engagement of cognitive control might be promising when aiming at reducing dual-task costs in standard training protocols. Thirdly, an important question to guide future research in this area is in which respect the ability to flexibly adopt complementary task-processing modes is related to fluid intelligence, further specifying the currently investigated link between core executive control competencies and fluid intelligence as well as flexible adaptation to environmental changes as a hallmark of fluid intelligence Duncan et al.

Starting from the question of what constitutes adaptive multitasking performance, we reviewed empirical evidence for two processing modes in multitasking that are not mutually exclusive, i. Demonstrating that parallel task processing is indeed possible when performing more than one task at a time has challenged the view that the frequently observed multitasking costs represent an inevitable consequence of a structural capacity limitation.

Instead, it suggests that these multitasking costs may signal a functional limitation e. In the second part of the review, we highlighted that evidence for parallel processing critically depends on the theoretical and methodological basis under which multitasking performance is assessed.

While serial task processing appears to be the most efficient multitasking processing strategy, participants are able to adopt parallel processing. Moreover, parallel processing can even outperform serial processing under certain conditions. Based on these highlighted insights into multitasking performance, future research aiming to further understand the nature of parallel versus serial processing of multiple tasks to unveil the secrets of multitasking efficiency needs to take into account the preconditions and environmental constraints under which multitasking is performed.

We believe that a flexible and context-sensitive recruitment of a more serial or more parallel processing strategy enables the agent to flexibly adjust to environmental demands, providing important mechanisms for adaptive intelligent behavior Cohen et al.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. When a cognitive process A is underway, another cognitive process B cannot operate at the same time.

For the assumption of parallel processing, however, processes A and B proceed simultaneously at least to certain degrees , i. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Front Psychol. Published online Sep 8. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. This article was submitted to Cognition, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.

Received May 12; Accepted Aug The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author s or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract In the context of performance optimizations in multitasking, a central debate has unfolded in multitasking research around whether cognitive processes related to different tasks proceed only sequentially one at a time , or can operate in parallel simultaneously.

Keywords: multitasking, dual-tasking, crosstalk, psychological refractory period PRP , cognitive control, functional bottleneck, bottleneck, parallel versus serial processing. Introduction A central aim in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience research on multitasking is to understand and optimize the underlying processes in order to increase efficiency when dealing with multiple tasks at the same time.

Open in a separate window. Parallel Processing Without the Assumption of Limited Resources The strict notion of limited resources and the consequential serial processing has been questioned on both experimental and theoretical grounds.

Theoretical Models Allowing for Parallel Processing Resource models represent a major group of theoretical models that allow for the possibility of parallel task processing. Shifting Between Parallel and Serial Processing Modes as Marker of Adaptive Behavior Even though the question of whether and to what extent parallel task processing is possible in dual-task performance is frequently discussed in the literature Han and Marois, , it might not be what we cognitive psychologists need to ask ourselves in this context.

Conclusion Starting from the question of what constitutes adaptive multitasking performance, we reviewed empirical evidence for two processing modes in multitasking that are not mutually exclusive, i. Conflict of Interest Statement The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. Footnotes 1 In more detail, serial processing means strict sequential processing of certain critical e.

References Allport A. New Directions , ed. Claxton G. On the division of attention: a disproof of the single channel hypothesis. Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory: a meta-analysis. Stress improves task processing efficiency in dual-tasks. Brain Res. Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. The source of execution-related dual-task interference: motor bottleneck or response monitoring?

Perception and Communication. London: Pergamon Press. Posner M. In real time example, there are multiple queues of people standing to get railway tickets. In this case, each queue is handled by multiple people, so multiple people will get tickets at a time.

Similarly, in the operating system, there are multiple queues of tasks and multiple tasks are completed by different processors at a time. An operating system running on the multicore processor is an example of the parallel operating system.

Windows 7, 8, 10 are examples of operating systems which do parallel processing. In today life all latest operating systems support parallel processing. Suppose MS Word program is running on your computer. This program may have several tasks running inside it. Note that processing goes in a sequential way. So instead, seeing them together enables you to quickly determine what you're seeing and make a decision about how to respond.

In this instance, parallel processing will enable you to recognize you need to get out of the way of the bus before it gets too close. So we're engaging in this process constantly, even though we're not conscious of it. Parallel processing also relies on a combination of top-down and bottom-up processing. While top-down and bottom-up processing may seem incompatible with one another, parallel processing relies on both at the same time to understand stimuli.

For instance, if you see a person jump off a pier and then hear a splashing sound, our senses may build a picture of the incoming data through bottom-up processing.

In contrast, top-down processing of sight and sound enables us to use our knowledge to understand that we saw the person jump into a body of water. Thus, with parallel processing, we can efficiently process and understand the stimuli we take in. While we use parallel processing all the time in our daily lives, many people are able to increase their ability to parallel process in specialized areas of their lives through practice. For instance, people who type on a daily basis will soon become experts, and this will reduce the number of cognitive resources the individual must dedicate to typing to the point where this task may require minimal or no thought.

This is called automaticity. There are degrees of automaticity. For example, more experienced drivers will likely have an easier time performing other tasks like attending to the directions of a navigation system while driving than less experienced drivers. Automaticity enables people to perform impressive feats of parallel processing.

For instance, in one study, researchers had students practice reading for comprehension while at the same time writing down dictated words that they categorized for meaning. The average person wouldn't be able to do this right away, but the participants learned to perform these tasks without difficulty over several weeks of practice.

That's because writing down the dictated words became automatic and no longer drew participants' attention away from what they were reading. While parallel processing has many advantages, it also has some important limitations. As a result, psychologists have long tried to determine how much information people can process in parallel. Research has arrived at different answers, but in general, the takeaway is that there is likely a limit to how much information we can process simultaneously before we have to rely on other strategies such as processing information serially, which may be less efficient.

Parallel processing is also limited by what psychologists call serial bottlenecks in information processing. As a general rule, we only pay attention to the most salient information in our environment because if we paid attention to every single piece of information, we'd be overwhelmed. However, there are a few tried-and-true ways that counselors and supervisors can avoid some of these common pitfalls.

Parallel processing psychology can be challenging and taxing, and doesn't work in every situation. If a counselor undergoes this grueling process, you can be sure that they genuinely care about their clients and want the best for them.

If you feel you are not getting what you need in a counseling situation, our trained counselors at BetterHelp can get you on the road to healing. They have participated in all kinds of supervisory activities, including parallel processing, to serve you better, no matter what issue you are struggling with.

Online therapy options are emerging now more than ever as effective, viable alternatives to in-person therapy. In fact, internet-based therapies, like those offered by BetterHelp, have been found to be just as effective in treating a broad range of mental health issues as face-to-face therapy. The nature of virtual therapy allows it break multiple barriers that are often in place with in-person therapy, such as convenience and affordability. Continue reading below for reviews of some of our board-certified, experienced therapists from people working through a variety of issues.

She handles technical issues with grace, and creates a warm, safe environment. She is person focused and makes you feel heard as an individual, rather than scrambling through notes to remember which virtual client you are.

Laura can shift seamlessly from listening to offering advice or coping techniques. Laura draws on her life experiences to relate to clients and make you feel like a human rather than a problem to be solved. She is able to shift from serious conversations to light-hearted ones, helping keep the "heaviness" that often comes with processing trauma at a manageable level. Overall, Laura is easy to work with, is flexible with scheduling and makes me feel like my needs are addressed.



0コメント

  • 1000 / 1000