Otermans · Psychological research 2022 · Controlled laboratory experiment · n=?

The working memory costs of a central attentional bottleneck in multitasking.

Cited 9 times in the scientific literature.

Level 2 - randomized trial

Level 2 by design analogy (controlled experimental laboratory study).

PubMed 34751812 · doi:10.1007/s00426-021-01615-1 · record verified 2026-08-28

What was done

Researchers integrated the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm with a working memory (WM) task to create a complex WM span task across multiple experiments. Participants memorized a sequence of letters, completed either a single task or a dual task (with difficulty manipulated across two follow-up experiments) during the retention interval, and then recalled the letter sequence in order.

What was found

Working memory performance (the quantity of letters recalled in correct order) decreased when participants performed a dual task during the retention interval compared to a single task. Two follow-up experiments manipulating dual-task difficulty showed consistent reductions in recall. The abstract does not provide specific numerical values, error rates, or effect sizes.

Why it matters

This study provides evidence that serial processing in multitasking relies on active scheduling control mechanisms that directly recruit and deplete working memory executive resources.

Limits

The abstract omits sample sizes, participant demographics, and all quantitative data (such as means, standard deviations, and effect sizes). The laboratory-based letter recall and PRP paradigms also have limited ecological validity for complex real-world multitasking contexts.

Cited by