Abstract
Recent research has shown that holding telephone conversations disrupts one’s driving ability. We asked whether this effect could be attributed to a visual attention impairment. In Experiment 1, participants conversed on a telephone or listened to a narrative while engaged in multiple object tracking (MOT), a task requiring sustained visual attention. We found that MOT was disrupted in the telephone conversation condition, relative to single-task MOT performance, but that listening to a narrative had no effect. In Experiment 2, we asked which component of conversation might be interfering with MOT performance. We replicated the conversation and single-task conditions of Experiment 1 and added two conditions in which participants heard a sequence of words over a telephone. In the shadowing condition, participants simply repeated each word in the sequence. In the generation condition, participants were asked to generate a new word based on each word in the sequence. Word generation interfered with MOT performance, but shadowing did not. The data indicate that telephone conversation disrupts attention at a central stage, the act of generating verbal stimuli, rather than at a peripheral stage, such as listening or speaking.
References
Allen, R., McGeorge, P., Pearson, D. G., & Milne, A. (2006). Multiple-target tracking: A role for working memory? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1101–1116.
Allport, D. A., Antonis, B., & Reynolds, P. (1972). On the division of attention: A disproof of the single channel hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 225–235.
Alvarez, G. A., Horowitz, T. S., Arsenio, H. C., DiMase, J. S., & Wolfe, J. M. (2005). Do multielement visual tracking and visual search draw continuously on the same visual attention resources? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 31, 643–667.
Arnell, K. M. (2001). Cross-modal interactions in dual-task paradigms. In K. Shapiro (Ed.), The limits of attention: Temporal constraints in human information processing (pp. 141–177). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
Briem, V., & Hedman, L. R. (1995). Behavioural effects of mobile telephone use during simulated driving. Ergonomics, 38, 2536–2562.
Cavanagh, P., & Alvarez, G. A. (2005). Tracking multiple targets with multifocal attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 349–354.
Dell’Acqua, R., & Jolicoeur, P. (2000). Visual encoding of patterns is subject to dual-task interference. Memory & Cognition, 28, 184–191.
Donchin, E., & Coles, M. G. H. (1988). Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating? Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 11, 357–374.
Fougnie, D., & Marois, R. (2006). Distinct capacity limits for attention and working memory: Evidence from attentive tracking and visual working memory paradigms. Psychological Science, 17, 526–534.
Grabowecky, M., Iordanescu, L., & Suzuki, S. (2007). Attentive tracking involves a demand-based dynamic redistribution of attention [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 7(9), 580a.
Helleberg, J. R., & Wickens, C. D. (2003). Effects of data-link modality and display redundancy on pilot performance: An attentional perspective. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 13, 189–210.
Herdman, C. M., & Friedman, A. (1985). Multiple resources in divided attention: A cross-modal test of the independence of hemispheric resources. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 11, 40–49.
Horowitz, T. S., Klieger, S. B., Fencsik, D. E., Yang, K. K., Alvarez, G. A., & Wolfe, J. M. (2007). Tracking unique objects. Perception & Psychophysics, 69, 172–184.
Jolicoeur, P. (1999). Dual-task interference and visual encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 25, 596–616.
Levy, J., Pashler, H., & Boer, E. (2006). Central interference in driving: Is there any stopping the psychological refractory period? Psychological Science, 17, 228–235.
Loftus, G. R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476–490.
Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user’s guide (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
McCarley, J. S., Vais, M. J., Pringle, H., Kramer, A. F., Irwin, D. E., & Strayer, D. L. (2004). Conversation disrupts change detection in complex traffic scenes. Human Factors, 46, 424–436.
Navon, D., & Gopher, D. (1979). On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.
Pashler, H., & Johnston, J. C. (1998). Attentional limitations in dualtask performance. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Attention (pp. 155–189). Hove, U.K.: Psychology Press.
Pashler, H., & O’Brien, S. (1993). Dual-task interference and the cerebral hemispheres. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 19, 315–330.
Pelli, D. G. (1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10, 437–442.
Pylyshyn, Z. W., & Storm, R. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3, 179–197.
Shaffer, L. H. (1975). Multiple attention in continuous verbal tasks. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance V (pp. 157–167). New York: Academic Press.
Sirevaag, E. J., Kramer, A. F., Coles, M. G. H., & Donchin, E. (1989). Resource reciprocity: An event-related brain potentials analysis. Acta Psychologica, 70, 77–97.
Spence, C., & Read, L. (2003). Speech shadowing while driving: On the difficulty of splitting attention between eye and ear. Psychological Science, 14, 251–256.
Strayer, D. L., & Drews, F. A. (2007). Cell-phone-induced driver distraction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 128–131.
Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Crouch, D. J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human Factors, 48, 381–391.
Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phoneinduced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 9, 23–32.
Strayer, D. L., & Johnston, W. A. (2001). Driven to distraction: Dualtask studies of simulated driving and conversing on a cellular telephone. Psychological Science, 12, 462–466.
Ward, L. M., McDonald, J. J., & Golestani, N. (1998). Cross-modal control of attention shifts. In R. D. Wright (Ed.), Visual attention (pp. 232–268). New York: Oxford University Press.
Wickens, C. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In R. Parasuraman & D. R. Davies (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Wickens, C. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3, 159–177.
Wickens, C. D., Sandry, D. L., & Vidulich, M. (1983). Compatibility and resource competition between modalities of input, central processing, and output. Human Factors, 25, 227–248.
Wolfe, J. M., Place, S. S., & Horowitz, T. S. (2007). Multiple object juggling: Changing what is tracked during extended multiple object tracking. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 344–349.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research was supported by NIH Grant MH 65576 to T.S.H. R.C. was supported by Project Success, a program sponsored by the Harvard Medical School Office for Diversity and Community Partnership through the support of the Gustavus and Louise Pfeiffer Research Foundation.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kunar, M.A., Carter, R., Cohen, M. et al. Telephone conversation impairs sustained visual attention via a central bottleneck. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15, 1135–1140 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.6.1135
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.6.1135