Unilateral Presentation Paradigm in
Psychophysical Tasks:
Capability and Limitations
of Resource Approach
А.Gusev, I.Utochkin
Daniel Kahneman (1973).
Monograph “Attention and Effort”:
The first detailed elaboration in
Resource Approach
D. Kahneman – Nobel Prize in Economy, 2002
Concept of Resource in contemporary
Cognitive Science (two aspects)
1.
2.
Resource as descriptive metaphor: an
illustration of limited capacity in
information processing.
Resource as theoretical concept: a
principle of explanation of limited
capacity in information processing.
Resource as theoretical concept
Factors determining
task priority
What tasks demand
Resource (attention)
first of all?
Energetic task demands
Controlling
mechanism
(Allocation Policy)
How much Resource is
to be allocated to a task?
Task 1
OR
Task
Subtask 1
Task 2
Subtask 2
Arousal
Resource
Subtask 3
Task 3
Subtask 4
How much Resource is
at one’s disposal?
Subtask 5
Task 4
OR
Task 5
“Demons” of Resource Approach
1. Confusion of the descriptive and explanatory
aspects of Resourсe - vicious circle.
E.g.: Pashler H.(1999).
“… capacity is limited because Capacity is limited”
(Neumann, 1987)
“… attention influences attention” (Taylor, Klein,
1998)
2. Introducing infinitely many specific resources to
explain new results - vicious infinity.
E.g.: Wickens C. D. (1984).
Resource and alternative principles for explanation
of information processing limitations
Resource and Data limited processing (Norman &
Bobrow, 1975)
Cognitive schemes (Neisser, 1976)
Levels of processing (Craik & Lockhart, 1972)
Functional system or organ (Ukhtomski, 1978;
Anokhin, 1978; Leontiev, 1959)
Attentional networks (Posner, Raichle, 1994)

All of these concepts emphasize idea of functional
re-organization of task performance system.
Typical Domain of Resource approach
Tasks involving the following factors:
Arousal dynamics
Task difficulty
Typical “Resource” research paradigms:
Dual-task paradigm
Vigilance tasks
Psychological refractory period
Resource and Asymmetry
We suppose that research of brain asymmetry
allows:
 to clear the contribution of energetic (resource)
and functional mechanisms of task performance.
Friedman (1981) vs Luria (1973); Kinsbourne (1970) vs
Kimura (1961)
to clear the contribution of unitary (central) or
multiple (hemisphere specific) resource into
mechanisms of task performance

Friedman (1981) & Davidson (1998) vs Luria (1973)
Objectives of Experiment
1.
Investigate an influence of Task Difficulty on
Task Performance and Manifestations of Brain
Asymmetry.
2.
Investigate an influence of Arousal on Task
Performance and Manifestations of Brain
Asymmetry.
Methods
83 right-handed participants
Signal Detection Paradigm
Unilateral presentation of tonal signal on noise
background, “yes-no” method
Factor 1: Difficulty of signal detection task – TD (3
levels, 260 trials per level)
Factor 2: Self-report Arousal (Energetic and Tense
Arousal: Thayer,1968)
Dependent variables: RT, sdRT, P(hit), A`, Yes-rate;
Lateral indexes of RT, sdRT, P(hit), A` and Yes-rate

General Arousal (GA)
Tense Arousal
2
4
Energetic Arousal
1
3
Thayer, 1968
Results: effect of TD on Lateral indexes*
F=14.00; p<0.001
* - the same tendency is for sdRT, P(hit) and Yes-rate
Results: effects of TDGA on P(hit)*
F=2.73; p=0.04
Easy
Moderate
Difficult
* - the similar tendency is for A`
Results: effects of TDGA on sdRT
Easy
Moderate
Difficult
F=3.05; p=0.03
Results: effects of TDGA on Lateral indexes
Easy
Moderate
Difficult
F=2.88; p=0.04
Discussion
1. Ear asymmetry increases with task difficulty:
Resource interpretation
The increment may be a sign of
hemispheric resource allocation.
Functional interpretation
The increment may be a sign of
involvement of some hemispherespecific mechanism into task
performance.
2. Efficiency of task performance and performance
asymmetry reveal non-linear (Yerkes-Dodson-like)
relation to arousal variations:
Resource interpretation
Optimally aroused Ss have
sufficient resource and allocate it
optimally.
Functional interpretation
Redundant.
Discussion
3.Non-linear (Yerkes-Dodson-like) effect of arousal takes
place only in moderately difficult task.
Resource interpretation
1. Easy task demands little or no
effort (Posner & Snyder, 1975).
2. Difficult (threshold) task is
typical data-limited task so it
can`t be perfectly resolved by
only additional resource
involvement.
Functional interpretation
1. Easy task may be resolved with
extremely simplified or reduced
functional system.
2. Difficult task requires
involvement of extended
functional system and/or its
reorganizing, e.g., searching
adequate cognitive strategies.
General conclusions
1.
2.
Resource Approach predominantly
“works” in arousal-dependent tasks.
Comprehensive understanding of
difficult psychophysical tasks
performance requires additional usage
of some other concepts and models,
e.g., cognitive schemes, levels of
processing, functional system, etc.