Impact of process interference on memory encoding and retrieval processes in dual-task situations

Hensen, Sandra; Koch, Iring; Hirsch, Patricia · 2024 · Crossref

DOI: 10.3758/s13421-024-01539-2

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the cognitive mechanisms underlying dual-task interference during memory encoding and retrieval, motivated by the high rates of information loss in multitasking environments such as healthcare. While dual-tasking at the encoding stage consistently impairs memory performance, effects at the retrieval stage have been mixed. The authors aimed to determine whether these costs stem from general capacity limitations or task-specific processing conflicts. The research comprised two experiments using a dual-task paradigm. In Experiment 1, 48 participants performed an auditory-verbal free recall memory task alongside a visual-manual spatial Stroop task. The concurrent task was performed either during the encoding phase or the retrieval phase of the memory task. Participants were assigned to groups using either symbolic arrows or verbal words in the Stroop task to assess the impact of overlapping processing resources. Experiment 2 further examined the influence of processing conflicts in the concurrent reaction-time (RT) task on memory encoding using a time-locked analysis. The results indicated that dual-task conditions at the encoding stage significantly decreased recall accuracy and impaired concurrent RT task performance. In contrast, dual-task conditions at the retrieval stage slowed recall latency and impaired concurrent RT performance, but recall accuracy remained maintained. Experiment 1 also revealed larger Stroop congruency effects in dual-task conditions, suggesting increased processing conflict. However, Experiment 2 found no significant influence of this processing conflict on the success of memory encoding when analyzed in a time-locked manner. The findings suggest that processes in both tasks share limited central capacity, leading to slowed parallel processing and performance decrements. Crucially, the study found no evidence that task-specific processing conflicts further influence memory encoding success beyond general capacity limitations. This implies that dual-task costs are primarily driven by resource competition rather than specific interference between task codes. These results clarify the cognitive mechanisms of multitasking interference, indicating that while retrieval is more resistant to accuracy loss than encoding, both stages suffer from capacity constraints that slow processing. This has implications for understanding information loss in high-stakes multitasking scenarios.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-25; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• dual task performance
• dual task multitasking