The influence of rewards on (sub-)optimal interleaving.

We investigate how the rewards of individual tasks dictate a priori how easy it is to interleave two discrete tasks efficiently, and whether people then interleave efficiently. Previous research found that people vary in their ability to interleave efficiently. Less attention has been given to whether it was realistic to expect efficient interleaving, given the reward rate of each of the involved tasks. Using a simulation model, we demonstrate how the rewards of individual tasks lead to different dual-task interleaving scenarios. We identify three unique dual-task scenarios. In easy scenarios, many strategies for time division between tasks can achieve optimal performance. This gives great opportunity to optimize performance, but also leads to variation in the applied strategies due to a lack of pressure to settle on a small set of optimal strategies. In difficult scenarios, the optimal strategy is hard to identify, therefore giving little opportunity to optimize. Finally, constrained scenarios have a well-defined prediction of the optimal strategy. It gives a narrow prediction, which limits the options to achieve optimal scores, yet given the structure people are able to optimize their strategies. These scenarios are therefore best to test people's general capability of optimizing interleaving. We report three empirical studies that test these hypotheses. In each study, participants interleave between two identical discrete tasks, that differ only in the underlying reward functions and the combined result (easy, difficult, or constrained scenario). Empirical results match the theoretical pattern as predicted by simulation models. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Effects of Second Language Proficiency and Linguistic Uncertainty on Recognition of Speech in Native and Nonnative Competing Speech.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of 2nd language proficiency and linguistic uncertainty on performance and listening effort in mixed language contexts. Method: Thirteen native speakers of Dutch with varying degrees of fluency in English listened to and repeated sentences produced in both Dutch and English and presented in the presence of single-talker competing speech in both Dutch and English. Target and masker language combinations were presented in both blocked and mixed (unpredictable) conditions. In the blocked condition, in each block of trials the target-masker language combination remained constant, and the listeners were informed of both prior to beginning the block. In the mixed condition, target and masker language varied randomly from trial to trial. All listeners participated in all conditions. Performance was assessed in terms of speech reception thresholds, whereas listening effort was quantified in terms of pupil dilation. Results: Performance (speech reception thresholds) and listening effort (pupil dilation) were both affected by 2nd language proficiency (English test score) and target and masker language: Performance was better in blocked as compared to mixed conditions, with Dutch as compared to English targets, and with English as compared to Dutch maskers. English proficiency was correlated with listening performance. Listeners also exhibited greater peak pupil dilation in mixed as compared to blocked conditions for trials with Dutch maskers, whereas pupil dilation during preparation for speaking was higher for English targets as compared to Dutch ones in almost all conditions. Conclusions: Both listener's proficiency in a 2nd language and uncertainty about the target language on a given trial play a significant role in how bilingual listeners attend to speech in the presence of competing speech in different languages, but precise effects also depend on which language is serving as target and which as masker.