Attentional guidance by working memory differs by paradigm: An individual-differences approach

被引:0
|
作者
Emma Wu Dowd
Anastasia Kiyonaga
Tobias Egner
Stephen R. Mitroff
机构
[1] Duke University,Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience
来源
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics | 2015年 / 77卷
关键词
Attention; Working memory; Attentional capture;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The contents of working memory (WM) have been repeatedly found to guide the allocation of visual attention; in a dual-task paradigm that combines WM and visual search, actively holding an item in WM biases visual attention towards memory-matching items during search (e.g., Soto et al., Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(2), 248-261, 2005). A key debate is whether such memory-based attentional guidance is automatic or under strategic control. Generally, two distinct task paradigms have been employed to assess memory-based guidance, one demonstrating that attention is involuntarily captured by memory-matching stimuli even at a cost to search performance (Soto et al., 2005), and one demonstrating that participants can strategically avoid memory-matching distractors to facilitate search performance (Woodman & Luck, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(2), 363-377, 2007). The current study utilized an individual-differences approach to examine why the different paradigms—which presumably tap into the same attentional construct—might support contrasting interpretations. Participants completed a battery of cognitive tasks, including two types of attentional guidance paradigms (see Soto et al., 2005; Woodman & Luck, 2007), a visual WM task, and an operation span task, as well as attention-related self-report assessments. Performance on the two attentional guidance paradigms did not correlate. Subsequent exploratory regression analyses revealed that memory-based guidance in each task was differentially predicted by visual WM capacity for one paradigm, and by attention-related assessment scores for the other paradigm. The current results suggest that these two paradigms—which have previously produced contrasting patterns of performance—may probe distinct aspects of attentional guidance.
引用
收藏
页码:704 / 712
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Understanding individual differences in representational abstraction: The role of working memory capacity
    Stukken, Loes
    Van Rensbergen, Bram
    Vanpaemel, Wolf
    Storms, Gert
    ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 2016, 170 : 94 - 102
  • [42] Individual differences in working memory capacity predict benefits to memory from intention offloading
    Ball, Hunter
    Peper, Phil
    Alakbarova, Durna
    Brewer, Gene
    Gilbert, Sam J.
    MEMORY, 2022, 30 (02) : 77 - 91
  • [43] The Role of Working Memory Capacity in the Temporal Compression of Episodic Memories: An Individual Differences Approach
    Leroy, Nathan
    Majerus, Steve
    D'Argembeau, Arnaud
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2025, 51 (02) : 285 - 300
  • [44] Simultaneous attentional guidance by working-memory and selection history reveals two distinct sources of attention
    Schwark, Jeremy D.
    Dolgov, Igor
    Sandry, Joshua
    Volkman, C. Brooks
    ACTA PSYCHOLOGICA, 2013, 144 (02) : 269 - 278
  • [45] Assessing the Role of the Left Dorsal Frontal Cortex in Working Memory Guidance: Attentional or Mnemonic? A Neurostimulation Study
    Bourbon-Teles, Jose
    Soto, David
    NEUROSCIENCE, 2019, 411 : 140 - 149
  • [46] Individual differences in working memory capacity and search efficiency
    Miller, Ashley L.
    Unsworth, Nash
    MEMORY & COGNITION, 2018, 46 (07) : 1149 - 1163
  • [47] Individual Differences in Attention Capture, Control, and Working Memory
    Garner, Lauren D.
    Robison, Matthew K.
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-HUMAN PERCEPTION AND PERFORMANCE, 2025, 51 (02) : 243 - 259
  • [48] Individual differences in the fan effect and working memory capacity
    Bunting, MF
    Conway, ARA
    Heitz, RP
    JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2004, 51 (04) : 604 - 622
  • [49] THE ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES IN WORKING MEMORY PERFORMANCE
    Pavlov, Yuri
    Pavlova, Nadezhda
    PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 2017, 54 : S56 - S56
  • [50] Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity and Shooting Behavior
    Brewer, Gene A.
    Ball, B. Hunter
    Ware, Jillian M.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH IN MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2016, 5 (02) : 185 - 191