scholarly journals Investigating the Role of Executive Resources across Aesthetic and Non-Aesthetic Judgments

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ionela Bara ◽  
Richard J Binney ◽  
Richard Ramsey
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Cognitive Architecture ◽  
Cognitive Resources ◽  
Similar Reaction ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Medium Type ◽  
Aesthetic Judgments

Aesthetic judgments dominate much of daily life by guiding how we evaluate objects, people, and experiences in our environment. One key question that remains unanswered is the extent to which more specialised or largely general cognitive resources support aesthetic judgments. To investigate this question in the context of executive resources, we examined the extent to which a central working memory load produces similar or different reaction time interference on aesthetic compared to non-aesthetic judgments. Across three pre-registered experiments that used Bayesian multi-level modelling approaches (N>100 per experiment), we found clear evidence that a central working memory load produces similar reaction time interference on aesthetic judgments relative to non-aesthetic (motion) judgments. We also showed that this similarity in processing across aesthetic versus non-aesthetic judgments holds across variations in the form of art (people vs landscape; Exps. 1-3), medium type (artwork vs photographs; Exp. 2) and load content (art images vs letters; Exps. 1-3). These findings suggest that across a range of experimental contexts, as well as different processing streams in working memory (e.g., visual vs verbal), aesthetic and motion judgments commonly rely on a domain-general executive system, rather than a system that is more specifically tied to aesthetic judgments. In doing so, these findings shine new light on the cognitive architecture that supports aesthetic judgments, as well as how domain-general executive systems operate more generally in cognition.

scholarly journals The Role of Cognitive Load in Intentional Forgetting Using the Think/No-Think Task

2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saima Noreen ◽  
Jan W. de Fockert
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Load Condition ◽  
Cognitive Resources ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Intentional Forgetting ◽  
Probe Test ◽  
Target Words

Abstract. We investigated the role of cognitive control in intentional forgetting by manipulating working memory load during the think/no-think task. In two experiments, participants learned a series of cue-target word pairs and were asked to recall the target words associated with some cues or to avoid thinking about the target associated with other cues. In addition to this, participants also performed a modified version of the n-back task which required them to respond to the identity of a single target letter present in the currently presented cue word (n = 0 condition, low working memory load), and in either the previous cue word (n = 1 condition, high working memory load, Experiment 1) or the cue word presented two trials previously (n = 2 condition, high working memory load, Experiment 2). Participants’ memory for the target words was subsequently tested using same and novel independent probes. In both experiments it was found that although participants were successful at forgetting on both the same and independent-probe tests in the low working memory load condition, they were only successful at forgetting on the same-probe test in the high working memory load condition. We argue that our findings suggest that the high load working memory task diverted attention from direct suppression and acted as an interference-based strategy. Thus, when cognitive resources are limited participants can switch between the strategies they use to prevent unwanted memories from coming to mind.

Specific Mental Arithmetic Difficulties and General Arithmetic Learning Difficulties: The Role of Phonological Working Memory

2020 ◽  
pp. 003329412091686
Author(s):  
Yi Ding ◽  
Ru-De Liu ◽  
Wei Hong ◽  
Qiong Yu ◽  
Jia Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Mental Arithmetic ◽  
Learning Difficulties ◽  
Sixth Graders ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Phonological Working Memory ◽  
Significant Difference

The aim of this paper was to examine the role of phonological working memory in specific mental arithmetic difficulties and general arithmetic learning difficulties (ALD; difficulties presenting in both mental arithmetic and written arithmetic). In Study 1, we categorized 53 sixth graders into a control group, a group with specific mental arithmetic difficulties, and a group with general ALD. The findings indicated the group with specific mental arithmetic difficulties performed significantly worse on the task involving phonological working memory than did the control group. However, a significant difference was not found between the group with general ALD and the control group. In Study 2 involving 54 sixth graders, we decreased the load of phonological working memory by changing the format of the problems from horizontal (more reliance on phonological codes) to vertical (more reliance on visual resources). We found that the group with specific mental arithmetic difficulties performed comparably to the control group. In other words, when the working memory load is reduced, they no longer lag significantly behind on mental arithmetic. However, the group with general ALD still performed significantly worse than the control group when the problems were presented vertically, indicating that reduced phonological working memory load did not alleviate their arithmetic difficulties. The findings in both studies suggested that poor phonological working memory might contribute to the underlying mechanism for specific mental arithmetic difficulties but not as much for general ALD.

scholarly journals Spatial working memory in visual search for multiple targets

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.S. Gorbunova
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Visual Search ◽  
Alternative Explanation ◽  
Spatial Working Memory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Search Efficiency ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Multiple Targets ◽  
Subsequent Search Misses

The article investigated the role of spatial working memory in visual search for multiple targets, in particular, in subsequent search misses effect. This phenomenon is the second target omission after the first target has been found in visual search task. One of the theoretical interpretations of subsequent search misses is the lack of resources (attention and/or working memory) after the first target is found. Experiment investigated dual-target visual search efficiency in standard conditions and with additional spatial working memory load. Additional working memory load did not have any significant impact in multiple target visual search efficiency. The results can due to the role of object, but not spatial working memory in this task. Alternative explanation assumes using special tools and strategies.

scholarly journals Inattention and task switching performance: the role of predictability, working memory load and goal neglect

2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (8) ◽  
pp. 2090-2110
Author(s):  
Gizem Arabacı ◽  
Benjamin A. Parris
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Switching Performance ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Goal Neglect

Abstract Inattention is a symptom of many clinical disorders including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is thought to be primarily related to limitations in working memory. In two studies, we investigated the implications of inattention for task switching performance. In study one, we measured task switching performance using predictable and unpredictable conditions in adults who self-rated inattention and other ADHD-related tendencies. Tasks required proactive control and reactive control, respectively, under both high and low working memory loads. Results revealed that inattentive, but not hyperactive/impulsive traits, predicted switch costs when switching was predictable and working memory load was high. None of the ADHD traits were related to unpredictable switch costs. Study two was designed to: (1) de-confound the role of proactive control and the need to keep track of task order in the predictable task switching paradigm; (2) investigate whether goal neglect, an impairment related to working memory, could explain the relationship between inattention and predictable task switching. Results revealed that neither predictability nor the need to keep track of the task order led to the association between switch costs and inattention, but instead it was the tendency for those high in inattention to neglect preparatory proactive control, especially when reactive control options were available.

Working Memory Load Selectively Influences Response Inhibition in a Stop Signal Task

2020 ◽  
pp. 003329412092827
Author(s):  
Leanne Boucher ◽  
Brandi Viparina ◽  
W. Matthew Collins
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Reaction Time ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Stop Signal Task ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Stop Signal Reaction Time ◽  
Load Conditions

Inhibitory control is a key executive function and has been studied extensively using the stop signal task. By applying a simple race model that posits an independent race between a GO process responsible for initiation of responses and a STOP process responsible for inhibition of responses, one can estimate how long it takes an individual to inhibit an ongoing response, the stop signal reaction time. Here, we examined how stop signal reaction time can be affected by working memory. Participants engaged in a dual task; they completed a stop signal task under low and high working memory load conditions. Working memory capacity was also measured. We found that the STOP process was lengthened in the high, compared to the low, working memory load condition, as evidenced by differences in stop signal reaction time. The GO process was unaffected and working memory capacity could not account for differences across the load conditions. These results indicate that inhibitory control can be influenced by placing demands on working memory.

scholarly journals Cognitive-Load Theory: Methods to Manage Working Memory Load in the Learning of Complex Tasks

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 394-398
Author(s):  
Fred Paas ◽  
Jeroen J. G. van Merriënboer
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Cognitive Load Theory ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Cognitive Architecture ◽  
Learning Task ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Instructional Control ◽  
Load Theory ◽  
New Methods

Cognitive-load researchers attempt to engineer the instructional control of cognitive load by designing methods that substitute productive for unproductive cognitive load. This article highlights proven and new methods to achieve this instructional control by focusing on the cognitive architecture used by cognitive-load theory and aspects of the learning task, the learner, and the learning environment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document