title: Parsing a cognitive task: a characterization of the mind's bottleneck.
abstract: Parsing a mental operation into components, characterizing the parallel or serial nature of this flow, and understanding what each process ultimately contributes to response time are fundamental questions in cognitive neuroscience. Here we show how a simple theoretical model leads to an extended set of predictions concerning the distribution of response time and its alteration by simultaneous performance of another task. The model provides a synthesis of psychological refractory period and random-walk models of response time. It merely assumes that a task consists of three consecutive stages-perception, decision based on noisy integration of evidence, and response-and that the perceptual and motor stages can operate simultaneously with stages of another task, while the central decision process constitutes a bottleneck. We designed a number-comparison task that provided a thorough test of the model by allowing independent variations in number notation, numerical distance, response complexity, and temporal asynchrony relative to an interfering probe task of tone discrimination. The results revealed a parsing of the comparison task in which each variable affects only one stage. Numerical distance affects the integration process, which is the only step that cannot proceed in parallel and has a major contribution to response time variability. The other stages, mapping the numeral to an internal quantity and executing the motor response, can be carried out in parallel with another task. Changing the duration of these processes has no significant effect on the variance.
authors.affiliation: Unité INSERM 562, Cognitive Neuroimaging Service Hospitalier Frédéric Joliot, CEA/DRM/DSV, Orsay cedex, France. sigman@shfj.cea.fr
authors.forename: Mariano
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Sigman
authors.forename: Stanislas
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Dehaene
mesh_terms: D000161:Acoustic Stimulation; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001921:Brain / Q000502:physiology*; D001931:Brain Mapping; D002755:Choice Behavior / Q000502:physiology; D003071:Cognition; D006801:Humans; D008606:Mental Processes / Q000502:physiology*; D008959:Models, Neurological; D015203:Reproducibility of Results
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 2001 Oct;86(4):1916-36
references.pmid: 11600651
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2004 Jun;15(6):390-6
references.pmid: 15147492
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2003 Nov;13(11):1257-69
references.pmid: 14576217
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1998 Apr;8(2):211-7
references.pmid: 9635204
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 2004 Mar;7(3):295-301
references.pmid: 14966525
references.citation: Nat Neurosci. 1999 Feb;2(2):176-85
references.pmid: 10195203
references.citation: Vis Neurosci. 1996 Jan-Feb;13(1):87-100
references.pmid: 8730992
references.citation: Ergonomics. 1970 Jan;13(1):37-58
references.pmid: 5416868
references.citation: Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1990 May;75(5):419-32
references.pmid: 1692277
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Mar;8(1):73-80
references.pmid: 11340869
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1994 Sep;116(2):220-44
references.pmid: 7972591
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1996 Jan 23;93(2):628-33
references.pmid: 8570606
references.citation: Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1999 Aug;9(4):487-93
references.pmid: 10448157
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2001 Jan 1;5(1):10-16
references.pmid: 11164731
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1989 Jun;45(6):557-66
references.pmid: 2740196
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1985 Oct;11(5):529-53
references.pmid: 2932529
references.citation: Curr Biol. 2000 Jun 1;10(11):R404-6
references.pmid: 10837238
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1997 Feb;77(2):1046-50
references.pmid: 9065870
references.citation: Neuron. 2002 Mar 14;33(6):959-72
references.pmid: 11906701
references.citation: Br J Math Stat Psychol. 1968 Nov;21(2):183-92
references.pmid: 5717928
references.citation: J Neurophysiol. 1996 Dec;76(6):4040-55
references.pmid: 8985899
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1967 Mar;67(3):202-13
references.pmid: 5341896
references.citation: Neuroreport. 1993 Sep 10;4(11):1272-4
references.pmid: 8219027
references.citation: Nature. 2000 Mar 23;404(6776):390-4
references.pmid: 10746726
references.citation: J Neurosci. 2002 Nov 1;22(21):9475-89
references.pmid: 12417672
references.citation: Nature. 1967 Sep 30;215(5109):1519-20
references.pmid: 6052760
references.citation: Neuron. 2004 Jan 8;41(1):165-73
references.pmid: 14715143
references.citation: Acta Psychol (Amst). 2001 Jan;106(1-2):147-246
references.pmid: 11256336
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2000 Aug;26(4):1352-70
references.pmid: 10946719
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Jul 8;100(14):8520-5
references.pmid: 12829797
references.citation: Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2001 Nov;33(4):457-69
references.pmid: 11816448
references.citation: Science. 1996 Oct 18;274(5286):427-30
references.pmid: 8832893
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1993 Dec;19(6):1292-312
references.pmid: 8294893
references.citation: Acta Psychol (Amst). 1979 Sep;43(5):381-412
references.pmid: 495175
references.citation: Nature. 1995 Sep 7;377(6544):59-62
references.pmid: 7659161
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1988 Apr;95(2):238-55
references.pmid: 3375400
references.citation: Science. 1980 Aug 8;209(4457):704-6
references.pmid: 7394529
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 2001;52:629-51
references.pmid: 11148320
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2003 Nov 15;15(8):1111-21
references.pmid: 14709230
references.citation: Nature. 1996 Jun 20;381(6584):697-9
references.pmid: 8649514
references.citation: Ann Neurosci. 2010 Jul;17(3):136-41
references.pmid: 25205891
references.citation: Neuroimage. 2001 Nov;14(5):1013-26
references.pmid: 11697933
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2003 Nov 15;15(8):1095-110
references.pmid: 14709229
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1979 May;86(3):446-61
references.pmid: 451109
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2001 Mar;12(2):101-8
references.pmid: 11340917
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 Nov;28(6):1187-99
references.pmid: 12450341
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1973 Nov;101(1):70-6
references.pmid: 4759642
references.citation: Neuron. 2004 Mar 25;41(6):983-93
references.pmid: 15046729
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):624-52
references.pmid: 11488380
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1960 Jan;67:1-15
references.pmid: 13795057
references.citation: J Neurosci. 1992 Dec;12(12):4745-65
references.pmid: 1464765
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Aug;27(4):862-9
references.pmid: 11518149
references.citation: Neuropsychologia. 1998 Nov;36(11):1167-79
references.pmid: 9842762
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 1996 Winter;8(1):47-68
references.pmid: 23972235
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):550-92
references.pmid: 11488378
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1999 Apr;106(2):261-300
references.pmid: 10378014
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1997 Jan;104(1):3-65
references.pmid: 9009880