On the Nature of the Probe Reaction-Time Task to Uncover the Attentional Demands of Movement

Abstract

McLeod (1980) reported some findings which showed that no phase of a movement was more attention-demanding than the other phases, contrary to all the results previously reported (e.g., Ells, 1973; Glencross, 1980). However, McLeod used a paradigm in which the two tasks were serial. Each task consisted of a series of 50 reaction time (RT) trials and/or 50 aiming movement trials. In addition to this, the interval of time between a response and the following signal within each series was constant. In order to try to replicate McLeod’s findings, two experiments were conducted in which the response-signal interval was manipulated. The hypothesis was that time certainty associated with a constant interval would facilitate the allocation of time and would thus artificially reduce the interference between tasks. In Experiment I, manual responses were used for the RT task; in Experiment II, they were vocal. Manipulation of the response-signal interval does not change one of the conclusions reached by McLeod: when the RT task involves vocal responses and the results on the RT task are analyzed in terms of response rather than stimulus arrival during the movement, then there is no phase of the movement which is more attention-demanding than the other phases. However, the results of Experiment II in which both the vocal RT task and the movement task significantly deteriorated in the dual-task condition were taken as an indication that the movement studied involved central attentional demands.