scholarly journals Visual foraging and executive functions: A developmental perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inga María Ólafsdóttir ◽  
Steinunn Gestsdóttir ◽  
Arni Kristjansson
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Visual Attention ◽  
Target Type ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Multiple Targets ◽  
Search Tasks ◽  
Single Target ◽  
Target Templates ◽  
Foraging Ability ◽  
Visual Foraging

In the past few years, interest in visual foraging, where participants search for multiple targets at a time, has increased, as such tasks may provide a richer picture of visual attention than traditional single-target visual search tasks. Little is known about visual foraging in childhood, so we tested 67 6th grade Icelandic children (mean age = 11.80 years, SD = 0.30 years; 36 girls) on a foraging task involving multiple targets of different types, also measuring three subdomains of executive functioning: inhibition, attentional flexibility, and working memory. The foraging results were then compared to findings from a previous study on younger children (66 children aged 4-7 years). The results show that foraging ability improves dramatically between the preschool and middle school years, and that this improvement reflects greater ease with switching between target types. The older children showed foraging patterns previously seen for adults: randomly switching between target templates during feature foraging, but exhaustively foraging for a single target type before switching during conjunction foraging. Younger children, conversely, tended to stick with the same target type for long runs during feature foraging. Switch costs were also much lower for the older children, resulting in faster and more efficient foraging. Lastly, a connection was established between foraging ability and both working memory and attentional flexibility, but not inhibition. Our study shows that foraging is a promising field of study to further our knowledge of visual attention, how it changes throughout the lifespan, and how it is connected to other cognitive functions.

scholarly journals The development of foraging organization

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Inga María Ólafsdóttir ◽  
Steinunn Gestsdóttir ◽  
Arni Kristjansson
Keyword(s):  
Path Length ◽  
Optimal Path ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Search Display ◽  
Target Type ◽  
Search Tasks ◽  
Visual Orienting ◽  
Single Target ◽  
Feature Based ◽  
Promising Avenue

In foraging tasks multiple targets must be found within a single display. The targets can be of one or more types, typically surrounded by numerous distractors. Visual attention has traditionally been studied with single target search tasks but adding more targets to the search display results in several additional measures of interest, such as how attention is oriented to different features and locations over time. We measured foraging among five age groups: Children in grades 1, 4, 7, and 10, as well as adults, using both simple feature foraging tasks and more challenging conjunction foraging tasks, with two target types per task. We assessed participants’ foraging organization, or systematicity when selecting all the targets within the foraging display, on four measures: Intertarget distance, number of intersections, best-r, and the percentage above optimal path length (PAO). We found that foraging organization increases with age, in both simple feature-based foraging and more complex foraging for targets defined by feature conjunctions, and that feature foraging was more organized than conjunction foraging. Separate analyses for different target types indicated that children’s, and to some extent adults’, conjunction foraging consisted of two relatively organized foraging paths through the display where one target type is exhaustively selected before the other target type is selected. Lastly, we found that the development of foraging organization is closely related to the development of other foraging measures. Our results suggest that measuring foraging organization is a promising avenue for further research into the development of visual orienting.

Do Children With Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) Have Difficulties With Interference Control, Visuospatial Working Memory, and Selective Attention? Developmental Patterns and the Role of Severity and Persistence of DLD

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (9) ◽  
pp. 3036-3050
Author(s):  
Elma Blom ◽  
Tessel Boerma
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Selective Attention ◽  
Language Disorder ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Developmental Language Disorder ◽  
Visuospatial Working Memory ◽  
Interference Control ◽  
Developmental Patterns ◽  
Search Tasks ◽  
The Impact

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.

scholarly journals Regular and Irregular Inflection in Different Groups of Bilingual Children and the Role of Verbal Short-Term and Verbal Working Memory

Languages ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 56
Author(s):  
Elma Blom ◽  
Evelyn Bosma ◽  
Wilbert Heeringa
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Parental Education ◽  
Digit Span ◽  
Verbal Working Memory ◽  
Bilingual Children ◽  
Inflectional Morphology ◽  
Typically Developing ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Linguistic Distance

Bilingual children often experience difficulties with inflectional morphology. The aim of this longitudinal study was to investigate how regularity of inflection in combination with verbal short-term and working memory (VSTM, VWM) influences bilingual children’s performance. Data from 231 typically developing five- to eight-year-old children were analyzed: Dutch monolingual children (N = 45), Frisian-Dutch bilingual children (N = 106), Turkish-Dutch bilingual children (N = 31), Tarifit-Dutch bilingual children (N = 38) and Arabic-Dutch bilingual children (N = 11). Inflection was measured with an expressive morphology task. VSTM and VWM were measured with a Forward and Backward Digit Span task, respectively. The results showed that, overall, children performed more accurately at regular than irregular forms, with the smallest gap between regulars and irregulars for monolinguals. Furthermore, this gap was smaller for older children and children who scored better on a non-verbal intelligence measure. In bilingual children, higher accuracy at using (irregular) inflection was predicted by a smaller cross-linguistic distance, a larger amount of Dutch at home, and a higher level of parental education. Finally, children with better VSTM, but not VWM, were more accurate at using regular and irregular inflection.

scholarly journals Individual differences in working memory capacity predict visual attention allocation

2003 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 884-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Kathryn Bleckley ◽  
Francis T. Durso ◽  
Jerry M. Crutchfield ◽  
Randall W. Engle ◽  
Maya M. Khanna
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Visual Attention ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Attention Allocation

scholarly journals Developmental Fractionation of Working Memory and Response Inhibition During Childhood

2007 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 30-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Satoshi Tsujimoto ◽  
Mariko Kuwajima ◽  
Toshiyuki Sawaguchi
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Cognitive Functions ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Childhood Development ◽  
Neural Systems ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Efficient Processing ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract. The lateral prefrontal cortex (LPFC) plays a major role in both working memory (WM) and response inhibition (RI), which are fundamental for various cognitive abilities. We explored the relationship between these LPFC functions during childhood development by examining the performance of two groups of children in visuospatial and auditory WM tasks and a go/no-go RI task. In the younger children (59 5- and 6-year-olds), performance on the visuospatial WM task correlated significantly with that in the auditory WM task. Furthermore, accuracy in these tasks correlated significantly with performance on the RI task, particularly in the no-go trials. In contrast, there were no significant correlations among those tasks in older children (92 8- and 9-year-olds). These results suggest that functional neural systems for visuospatial WM, auditory WM, and RI, especially those in the LPFC, become fractionated during childhood, thereby enabling more efficient processing of these critical cognitive functions.

scholarly journals Different activation patterns for working memory load and visual attention load

2007 ◽  
Vol 1132 ◽  
pp. 158-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Tomasi ◽  
L. Chang ◽  
E.C. Caparelli ◽  
T. Ernst
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Visual Attention ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Activation Patterns
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document