@article{SchumannSteinbornKuertenetal.,
  author    = {Schumann, Frank and Steinborn, Michael B. and K{\"u}rten, Jens and Cao, Liyu and H{\"a}ndel, Barbara Friederike and Huestegge, Lynn},
  title     = {Restoration of attention by rest in a multitasking world: theory, methodology, and empirical evidence},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  volume    = {13},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2022.867978},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-267913},
  abstract  = {In this work, we evaluate the status of both theory and empirical evidence in the field of experimental rest-break research based on a framework that combines mental-chronometry and psychometric-measurement theory. To this end, we (1) provide a taxonomy of rest breaks according to which empirical studies can be classified (e.g., by differentiating between long, short, and micro-rest breaks based on context and temporal properties). Then, we (2) evaluate the theorizing in both the basic and applied fields of research and explain how popular concepts (e.g., ego depletion model, opportunity cost theory, attention restoration theory, action readiness, etc.) relate to each other in contemporary theoretical debates. Here, we highlight differences between all these models in the light of two symbolic categories, termed the resource-based and satiation-based model, including aspects related to the dynamics and the control (strategic or non-strategic) mechanisms at work. Based on a critical assessment of existing methodological and theoretical approaches, we finally (3) provide a set of guidelines for both theory building and future empirical approaches to the experimental study of rest breaks. We conclude that a psychometrically advanced and theoretically focused research of rest and recovery has the potential to finally provide a sound scientific basis to eventually mitigate the adverse effects of ever increasing task demands on performance and well-being in a multitasking world at work and leisure.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{BrychHaendelRiechelmannetal.2021,
  author    = {Brych, Mareike and H{\"a}ndel, Barbara F. and Riechelmann, Eva and Pieczykolan, Aleksandra and Huestegge, Lynn},
  title     = {Effects of vocal demands on pupil dilation},
  series = {Psychophysiology},
  volume    = {58},
  journal   = {Psychophysiology},
  number    = {2},
  doi       = {10.1111/psyp.13729},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-224425},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Pupil dilation is known to be affected by a variety of factors, including physical (e.g., light) and cognitive sources of influence (e.g., mental load due to working memory demands, stimulus/response competition etc.). In the present experiment, we tested the extent to which vocal demands (speaking) can affect pupil dilation. Based on corresponding preliminary evidence found in a reanalysis of an existing data set from our lab, we setup a new experiment that systematically investigated vocal response-related effects compared to mere jaw/lip movement and button press responses. Conditions changed on a trial-by-trial basis while participants were instructed to keep fixating a central cross on a screen throughout. In line with our prediction (and previous observation), speaking caused the pupils to dilate strongest, followed by nonvocal movements and finally a baseline condition without any vocal or muscular demands. An additional analysis of blink rates showed no difference in blink frequency between vocal and baseline conditions, but different blink dynamics. Finally, simultaneously recorded electromyographic activity showed that muscle activity may contribute to some (but not all) aspects of the observed effects on pupil size. The results are discussed in the context of other recent research indicating effects of perceived (instead of executed) vocal action on pupil dynamics.},
  language  = {en}
}