scholarly journals The Allocation of Attention and Working Memory in Visual Crowding

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1180-1193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix Bacigalupo ◽  
Steven J. Luck

When the distance between a visual target and nearby flankers falls below a critical distance, target discrimination declines precipitously. This is called “crowding.” Many researchers have proposed that selective attention plays a role in crowding. However, although some research has examined the effects of directing attention toward versus away from the targets, no previous research has assessed how attentional allocation varies as a function of target–flanker distance in crowding. Here, we used ERPs to assess the operation of attention during crowding, focusing on the attention-related N2pc component. We used a typical crowding task in which participants were asked to report the category (vowel/consonant) of a lateralized target letter flanked by distractor letters at different distances. We tested the hypothesis that attention fails when the target–flanker distance becomes too small for attention to operate effectively. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found that N2pc amplitude was maximal at intermediate target–flanker distances and decreased substantially when crowding became severe. In addition, we examined the sustained posterior contralateral negativity (SPCN), which reflects the amount of information being maintained in working memory. Unlike the N2pc component, the SPCN increased in amplitude at small target–flanker distances, suggesting that observers stored information about the target and flankers in working memory when attention failed to select the target. Together, the N2pc and SPCN results suggest that attention and working memory play distinctive roles in crowding: Attention operates to minimize interference from the flankers at intermediate target–flanker distances, whereas working memory may be recruited when attention fails to select the target at small target–flanker distances.

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (9) ◽  
pp. 3036-3050
Author(s):  
Elma Blom ◽  
Tessel Boerma

Purpose Many children with developmental language disorder (DLD) have weaknesses in executive functioning (EF), specifically in tasks testing interference control and working memory. It is unknown how EF develops in children with DLD, if EF abilities are related to DLD severity and persistence, and if EF weaknesses expand to selective attention. This study aimed to address these gaps. Method Data from 78 children with DLD and 39 typically developing (TD) children were collected at three times with 1-year intervals. At Time 1, the children were 5 or 6 years old. Flanker, Dot Matrix, and Sky Search tasks tested interference control, visuospatial working memory, and selective attention, respectively. DLD severity was based on children's language ability. DLD persistence was based on stability of the DLD diagnosis. Results Performance on all tasks improved in both groups. TD children outperformed children with DLD on interference control. No differences were found for visuospatial working memory and selective attention. An interference control gap between the DLD and TD groups emerged between Time 1 and Time 2. Severity and persistence of DLD were related to interference control and working memory; the impact on working memory was stronger. Selective attention was unrelated to DLD severity and persistence. Conclusions Age and DLD severity and persistence determine whether or not children with DLD show EF weaknesses. Interference control is most clearly impaired in children with DLD who are 6 years and older. Visuospatial working memory is impaired in children with severe and persistent DLD. Selective attention is spared.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashley DiPuma ◽  
Kelly Rivera ◽  
Edward Ester

Working memory (WM) performance can be improved by an informative cue presented during storage. This effect, termed a retro-cue benefit, can be used to explore mechanisms of attentional prioritization in WM. Directing attention to a single item stored in memory is known to increase memory precision while decreasing the likelihood of incorrect item reports and random guesses, but it is unclear whether similar benefits manifest when participants direct attention to multiple items stored in memory. We tested this possibility by quantifying memory performance when participants were cued to prioritize one or two items stored in working memory. Consistent with prior work, cueing participants to prioritize a single memory item yielded higher recall precision, fewer swap errors, and fewer guesses relative to a neutral cue condition. Conversely, cueing participants to prioritize two memory items yielded fewer swap errors relative to a neutral condition, but no differences in recall precision or guess rates. Although swap rates were less likely during the cue-two vs. neutral conditions, planned comparisons revealed that when participants made swap errors during cue-two trials they were far more likely to confuse two prioritized stimuli than they were to confuse a prioritized stimulus vs. a non-prioritized stimulus. Our results suggest that it is possible to prioritize multiple items stored in memory, with the caveat that doing so may increase the probability of confusing prioritized items.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256228
Author(s):  
Saleh M. H. Mohamed ◽  
Marah Butzbach ◽  
Anselm B. M Fuermaier ◽  
Matthias Weisbrod ◽  
Steffen Aschenbrenner ◽  
...  

Background Many clinical studies reported deficits in basic and complex cognitive functions in adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). However, the extent in which deficits in basic functions (i.e., processing speed and distractibility) contribute to complex cognitive impairments (i.e., working memory, planning, cognitive flexibility, memory functions) in adults with ADHD is not well-studied. So far, literature show only one study, revealing that basic functions explain 27–74% of executive dysfunctions. Yet, the authors reported that findings could be affected by the selection of neuropsychological tests. The goal of the present research is to replicate such a finding using a different sample and a different set of neuropsychological tests. Methods Forty-eight adult patients with ADHD were compared with 48 healthy controls in basic cognitive functions, namely processing speed and distractibility and more complex cognitive functions, namely selective attention, cognitive flexibility, planning, working memory, verbal fluency, and verbal memory. Basic and complex cognitive functions were assessed using the Vigilance and Sustained Attention, Selective Attention, N-Back, Tower of London, Trail Making Test, Word Fluency, and Verbal Learning and Memory. Results and conclusion Logistic regression analyses showed that impairments in complex cognitive functions explained 25% of the variance in ADHD diagnosis. The explained variance dropped from 25% to 9% after considering basic functions of processing speed and distractibility. This 64% reduction highlights the importance of basic functions for impairments in complex functions in patients with ADHD.


2019 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Yushau Yusuf ◽  
Muhammad U.A ◽  
Isah F.A

Working memory is a system that is responsible for transient holding and processing of new and already stored information. It also involves processing for reasoning, comprehension, learning and memory updating. Headphones are a pair of small loudspeakers that are designed to be held in place close to a user’s ear. They are electroacoustic transducers which convert electrical signals to a corresponding sound in the user’s ear. Several studies have recently shown a link between cognitive abilities and response to hearing aid and signal processing in the brain. Therefore, the relationship between headphone usage among healthy subjects become pertinent. This study is aimed at evaluating the effect of headphone on working memory using N-back task. One hundred (100) participants (55 headphone users and 45 non-headphone user’s) within the age range of 18-31 years were assessed. Participants were instructed to keep in memory, a series of letters and say “target” whenever there was a repetition of letter with exactly one intervening letter and to remain silent when any other letter appeared. The results of this study showed that there was no statistically significant difference in working memory between headphone and non-headphone users with p>0.05. In conclusion, this study revealed headphone use has no effect on working memory of the participants subjected to N–back test.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document