Individual Differences in the Dynamics of Attention Control

被引:0
作者
Unsworth, Nash [1 ]
Miller, Ashley L. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oregon, Dept Psychol, Eugene, OR 97403 USA
[2] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Dept Psychol, Los Angeles, CA USA
关键词
attention control; conflict resolution; mouse tracking; individual differences; working memory; WORKING-MEMORY CAPACITY; LATENT-VARIABLE ANALYSIS; MOUSE-TRACKING; EXECUTIVE ATTENTION; TASKS; INTERFERENCE; RELIABILITY; INHIBITION; REVEALS;
D O I
10.1037/xge0001695
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Individual differences in the dynamics of attention control were examined in two studies. Participants performed mouse tracker versions of Stroop (Studies 1 and 2) and flankers (Study 2), along with additional measures of attention control and working memory to better examine individual differences in how conflict resolution processes unfold over time. Attention control abilities were related to the amount of attraction to the incorrect response and the time to move toward the correct response on incongruent trials in the Stroop task. In the flanker task, attention control abilities were not related to the amount of attraction to the incorrect response but were related to the time to move toward the correct response on incongruent trials. Mouse tracker measures in both Stroop and flankers demonstrated acceptable psychometric properties and tended to load moderately on an attention control factor along with other attention control tasks. These results are consistent with the notion that conflict resolution processes in Stroop and flankers likely reflect both overlapping and distinct (i.e., restraining and constraining attention) processes that are related to broader attention control abilities.
引用
收藏
页码:829 / 851
页数:23
相关论文
共 80 条
[1]  
BENTLER PM, 1990, PSYCHOL BULL, V107, P238, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
[2]   Measuring Adaptive Control in Conflict Tasks [J].
Braem, Senne ;
Bugg, Julie M. ;
Schmidt, James R. ;
Crump, Matthew J. C. ;
Weissman, Daniel H. ;
Notebaert, Wim ;
Egner, Tobias .
TRENDS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCES, 2019, 23 (09) :769-783
[3]   ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF ASSESSING MODEL FIT [J].
BROWNE, MW ;
CUDECK, R .
SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 1992, 21 (02) :230-258
[4]   Early and late indications of item-specific control in a Stroop mouse tracking study [J].
Bundt, Carsten ;
Ruitenberg, Marit F. L. ;
Abrahamse, Elger L. ;
Notebaert, Wim .
PLOS ONE, 2018, 13 (05)
[5]   ON THE CONTROL OF AUTOMATIC PROCESSES - A PARALLEL DISTRIBUTED-PROCESSING ACCOUNT OF THE STROOP EFFECT [J].
COHEN, JD ;
DUNBAR, K ;
MCCLELLAND, JL .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1990, 97 (03) :332-361
[6]   Working Memory Updating and Binding Training: Bayesian Evidence Supporting the Absence of Transfer [J].
De Simoni, Carla ;
von Bastian, Claudia C. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2018, 147 (06) :829-858
[7]   MICROCOMPUTER ANALYSES OF PERFORMANCE ON A PORTABLE, SIMPLE VISUAL RT TASK DURING SUSTAINED OPERATIONS [J].
DINGES, DF ;
POWELL, JW .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUMENTS & COMPUTERS, 1985, 17 (06) :652-655
[8]   A Toolbox Approach to Improving the Measurement of Attention Control [J].
Draheim, Christopher ;
Tsukahara, Jason S. ;
Martin, Jessie D. ;
Mashburn, Cody A. ;
Engle, Randall W. .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2021, 150 (02) :242-275
[9]   Reaction Time in Differential and Developmental Research: A Review and Commentary on the Problems and Alternatives [J].
Draheim, Christopher ;
Mashburn, Cody A. ;
Martin, Jessie D. ;
Engle, Randall W. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL BULLETIN, 2019, 145 (05) :508-535
[10]   The Cognitive Underpinnings of Multiply-Constrained Problem Solving [J].
Ellis, Derek M. ;
Robison, Matthew K. ;
Brewer, Gene A. .
JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENCE, 2021, 9 (01) :1-25