Does a concurrent cognitive task affect the dynamics of bimanual rhythmic coordination? In‐phase coordination was performed under manipulations of phase detuning and movement frequency and either singly or in combination with an arithmetic task. Predicted direction‐specific shifts in stable relative phase from 0° due to detuning and movement frequency were amplified by the cognitive task. Nonlinear cross‐recurrence analysis suggested that this cognitive influence on the locations of the stable points or attractors of coordination entailed a magnification of attractor noise without (...) a reduction in attractor strength. An approximation to these findings was achieved through parameter changes in a motion equation in relative phase. Results are discussed in terms of dual‐task performance as limited resources, dynamics rather than chronometrics, and reparameterization rather than degradation. (shrink)

The neural basis of phonological working memory was investigated through an examination of the effects of irrelevant speech distractors and disruptive neural stimulation from transcranial magnetic stimulation. Embedded processes models argue that the same regions involved in speech perception are used to support phonological WM whereas buffer models assume that a region separate from speech perception regions is used to support WM. Thus, according to the embedded processes approach but not the buffer approach, irrelevant speech and TMS to the speech (...) perception region should disrupt the decoding of phonological WM representations. According to the buffer account, decoding of WM items should be possible in the buffer region despite distraction and should be disrupted with TMS to this region. Experiment 1 used fMRI and representational similarity analyses with a delayed recognition memory paradigm using nonword stimuli. Results showed that decoding of memory items in the speech perception regions was possible in the absence of distractors. However, the decoding evidence in the left STG was susceptible to interference from distractors presented during the delay period whereas decoding in the proposed buffer region persisted. Experiment 2 examined the causal roles of the speech processing region and the buffer region in phonological WM performance using TMS. TMS to the SMG during the early delay period caused a disruption in recognition performance for the memory nonwords, whereas stimulations at the STG and an occipital control region did not affect WM performance. Taken together, results from the two experiments are consistent with predictions of a buffer model of phonological WM, pointing to a critical role of the left SMG in maintaining phonological representations. (shrink)