Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic01:25

The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic

7.5K
In order to make good decisions, we use our knowledge and our reasoning. Often, this knowledge and reasoning is sound and solid. However, sometimes, we are swayed by biases or by others manipulating a situation. For example, let’s say you and three friends wanted to rent a house and had a combined target budget of $1,600. The realtor shows you only very run-down houses for $1,600 and then shows you a very nice house for $2,000. Might you ask each person to pay more in rent to get the...
7.5K
Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance01:14

Frustration and Conflict: Avoidance-Avoidance, Double-Approach Avoidance

214
Avoidance-avoidance conflict refers to a psychological situation where a person must choose between two or more unpleasant alternatives. These conflicts are particularly stressful because neither option is desirable. This dilemma is often expressed in sayings like "caught between a rock and a hard place" or "between the devil and the deep blue sea." For instance, individuals who fear dental procedures may find themselves torn between enduring a painful toothache or facing the...
214
Group Design02:01

Group Design

9.8K
The most basic experimental design involves two groups: the experimental group and the control group. The two groups are designed to be the same except for one difference— experimental manipulation. The experimental group gets the experimental manipulation—that is, the treatment or variable being tested—and the control group does not. Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between...
9.8K
Frustration and Conflict: Approach-Approach, Approach-Avoidance01:20

Frustration and Conflict: Approach-Approach, Approach-Avoidance

200
Frustration occurs when people are obstructed or prevented from achieving a desired goal or fulfilling a perceived need. For example, when someone's input is ignored in a discussion, it can lead to feelings of frustration. Conflict, however, arises from opposing interests, goals, or actions. Conflicts can take various forms based on the nature of these opposing desires or goals.
One common type of conflict is the Approach–Approach Conflict. In this case, a person faces two desirable...
200

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Compatibility Effects With Simple Lever Tools: A Replication and Extension Beyond Simple Button Responses.

Human factors·2026
Same author

Conflict adaptation in a confound-minimized face-word Stroop task: exploring the potential settings of an fMRI-related experiment.

Frontiers in psychology·2026
Same author

The asymmetric list shift effect - flexible adaptation to new context demands?

Attention, perception & psychophysics·2026
Same author

Is multitasking efficient? Different metrics, different conclusions.

Psychological research·2026
Same author

An attempt to replicate action-effect learning and its generalization without stimulus-stimulus learning.

Psychological research·2026
Same author

Ten years Diffusion Model for Conflict (DMC) tasks: Theoretical foundations, applications, practical recommendations, and open challenges.

Psychonomic bulletin & review·2026
Same journal

Exploring themes in music therapy: A scoping review.

Acta psychologica·2026
Same journal

Human-robot collaboration and customer-directed spillover: A daily diary study of state job apathy.

Acta psychologica·2026
Same journal

Feedback is associated with higher subjective values of n-Back levels in effort discounting.

Acta psychologica·2026
Same journal

Understanding Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in university students: Exploring the roles of neurotic perfectionism, parental perception, and stressful life events.

Acta psychologica·2026
Same journal

Tailoring instruction to personality: The mediating role of cognitive tendencies in the effect of extraversion on higher vocational college students' self-regulated learning.

Acta psychologica·2026
Same journal

Physical activity and loneliness in rural left-behind children: The mediating roles of social anxiety and self-concept.

Acta psychologica·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Oct 12, 2025

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions
10:38

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

Published on: July 16, 2015

13.7K

Two types of between-task conflict trigger respective processing adjustments within one dual-task.

Devu Mahesan1, Markus Janczyk2, Rico Fischer1

  • 1University of Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Acta Psychologica
|November 25, 2021
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study shows that two types of backward crosstalk effects (BCE) in dual tasking, compatibility-based BCE and no-go BCE, can occur simultaneously and trigger distinct processing adjustments, demonstrating sequential modulation in cognitive control.

Keywords:
Backward crosstalkCognitive controlDual taskMultitaskingSequential modulation

More Related Videos

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
07:52

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen

Published on: October 5, 2020

3.7K
Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
06:45

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

6.3K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Oct 12, 2025

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions
10:38

A Cognitive Paradigm to Investigate Interference in Working Memory by Distractions and Interruptions

Published on: July 16, 2015

13.7K
Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen
07:52

Revised and Neuroimaging-Compatible Versions of the Dual Task Screen

Published on: October 5, 2020

3.7K
Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal
06:45

Task Interruption and Resumption Paradigm for Testing the Activation and Pursuit of an Abstract Thinking Goal

Published on: April 18, 2017

6.3K

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Neuroscience
  • Human-Computer Interaction

Background:

  • Dual tasking involves managing interference between simultaneously performed tasks.
  • Backward crosstalk effects (BCE) represent conflicts where Task 2 impacts Task 1 performance.
  • Two primary BCEs exist: compatibility-based (response selection conflict) and no-go (motor execution conflict due to inhibition).

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate if both compatibility-based and no-go BCEs can be elicited within a single dual-task paradigm.
  • To determine if these distinct BCEs trigger specific processing adjustments, known as sequential modulation.
  • To explore the interplay and regulation of cognitive control under dual-task conditions with overlapping task demands.

Main Methods:

  • Three experiments were conducted using a dual-task setup where participants performed number categorization (Task 1) alongside a go/no-go task (Task 2).
  • Compatibility-based BCE was manipulated through dimensional overlap in stimuli (Experiments 1 & 2) and response categories (Experiment 3).
  • No-go BCE was induced by using '5' as a no-go stimulus in Task 2, requiring response inhibition that could interfere with Task 1.

Main Results:

  • Both compatibility-based and no-go BCEs were successfully induced within the same dual-task experiments.
  • Evidence suggests that each type of BCE elicits its own specific sequential modulation.
  • The findings indicate distinct cognitive control adjustments for different types of between-task conflict.

Conclusions:

  • Dual-tasking paradigms can effectively generate multiple types of backward crosstalk effects concurrently.
  • Different between-task conflicts, specifically compatibility-based and no-go BCEs, lead to distinct and independent sequential modulations in cognitive processing.
  • This research provides insights into the adaptive regulation of cognitive control when facing complex dual-task demands.