Multitasking versus multiplexing: Toward a normative account of limitations in the simultaneous execution of control-demanding behaviors
Author(s)
Schwemmer, M.; Feng, S. F.; Cohen, J. D.; Gershman, Samuel J
Download13415_2013_Article_236.pdf (1007.Kb)
PUBLISHER_POLICY
Publisher Policy
Article is made available in accordance with the publisher's policy and may be subject to US copyright law. Please refer to the publisher's site for terms of use.
Terms of use
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
Why is it that behaviors that rely on control, so striking in their diversity and flexibility, are also subject to such striking limitations? Typically, people cannot engage in more than a few—and usually only a single—control-demanding task at a time. This limitation was a defining element in the earliest conceptualizations of controlled processing; it remains one of the most widely accepted axioms of cognitive psychology, and is even the basis for some laws (e.g., against the use of mobile devices while driving). Remarkably, however, the source of this limitation is still not understood. Here, we examine one potential source of this limitation, in terms of a trade-off between the flexibility and efficiency of representation (“multiplexing”) and the simultaneous engagement of different processing pathways (“multitasking”). We show that even a modest amount of multiplexing rapidly introduces cross-talk among processing pathways, thereby constraining the number that can be productively engaged at once. We propose that, given the large number of advantages of efficient coding, the human brain has favored this over the capacity for multitasking of control-demanding processes.
Date issued
2014-01Department
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Brain and Cognitive SciencesJournal
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Publisher
Springer US
Citation
Feng, S. F. et al. “Multitasking versus Multiplexing: Toward a Normative Account of Limitations in the Simultaneous Execution of Control-Demanding Behaviors.” Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 14.1 (2014): 129–146.
Version: Author's final manuscript
ISSN
1530-7026
1531-135X