scholarly journals The association between superior working memory and trait-rumination

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haruki Nishimura ◽  
Satoshi Mochizuki
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Attentional Control ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Working Memory Updating ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Time Required

Higher trait-rumination is associated with several psychopathologies. Previous studies showed that an impaired working memory in depressed patients was associated with higher trait-rumination. Meanwhile, in the nonclinical undergraduate population, a few studies reported the association between superior working memory and trait-rumination. To clarify the association between trait-rumination and the individual differences in working memory, we utilised two conceptually different working memory functions: attentional control and removal speed. Attentional control is involved in continuing to focus on goal-relevant information while blocking goal-irrelevant information and is reflected by working memory capacity. Removal speed is the time required to quickly remove goal-irrelevant information from working memory. Ninety-five undergraduate students took the reading span test and the working-memory-updating task to measure these functions. Results showed that increased trait-rumination was correlated to superior performance in the attentional control as well as the removal speed after controlling depressive symptoms. The current findings suggest that higher trait-rumination in undergraduate students is characterized by superior working memory, which contrasts with prior findings of people with depression. Further studies should examine the roles of superior working memory from the viewpoint of the developmental processes of rumination.

scholarly journals Individual differences in working memory capacity and filtering

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Kyle Robison ◽  
Ashley L. Miller ◽  
Nash Unsworth
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Constant Number ◽  
Complex Span ◽  
Span Tasks ◽  
Trial Basis ◽  
The Relationship

In three experiments we examined individual differences in working memory (WM) and their relationship with filtering – the selective encoding and maintenance of relevant information in the presence of irrelevant information. While some accounts argue that filtering is an important element of individual differences in WM (McNab & Klingberg, 2008; Robison & Unsworth, 2017a; Unsworth & Robison, 2016; Vogel, McCollough, & Machizawa, 2005), recent investigations have challenged this view (Mall, Morey, Wolff, & Lehnert, 2014; Shipstead, Lindsey, Marshall, & Engle, 2014). In all three experiments, we measured WM span with three complex span tasks and then had participants complete a visual WM task with a filtering component. In Experiment 1, participants were instructed to remember the orientation of relevant items (red rectangles) and ignore irrelevant items (blue rectangles). In Experiment 2, the color of relevant items changed randomly on a trial-by-trial basis. In Experiment 3, we presented a constant number of items. On half of trials, participants were told which color item would be tested before each trial. On the other half of trials, participants received no such cue. In situations where filtering was especially required, WM span accounted for a significant portion of variance in filtering trials beyond shared variance between filtering and non-filtering trials. We argue that filtering is one of several control processes that gives rise to individual differences in WM, but that the relationship is constrained by the degree to which filtering is demanded by the task.

Distinct profiles of stimulus specific cortical activity for ignoring distraction during working memory encoding and maintenance, and associations with performance

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlotte Ashton ◽  
André Gouws ◽  
Marcus Glennon ◽  
THEODORE ZANTO ◽  
Steve Tipper ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Cortical Activity ◽  
Irrelevant Information ◽  
Neural Mechanisms ◽  
Memory Encoding ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Short Time

Abstract Our ability to hold information in mind for a short time (working memory) is separately predicted by our ability to ignore two types of distraction: distraction that occurs while we put information into working memory (encoding) and distraction that occurs while we maintain already encoded information within working memory. This suggests that ignoring these different types of distraction involves distinct mechanisms which separately limit performance. Here we used fMRI to measure category-sensitive cortical activity and probe these mechanisms. The results reveal specific neural mechanisms by which relevant information is remembered and irrelevant information is ignored, which contribute to intra-individual differences in WM performance.

scholarly journals Early Auditory Evoked Potential Is Modulated by Selective Attention and Related to Individual Differences in Visual Working Memory Capacity

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 2682-2690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Giuliano ◽  
Christina M. Karns ◽  
Helen J. Neville ◽  
Steven A. Hillyard
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
Selective Attention ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Auditory Evoked Potential ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Auditory Selective Attention ◽  
Visual Change Detection ◽  
Listening Task

A growing body of research suggests that the predictive power of working memory (WM) capacity for measures of intellectual aptitude is due to the ability to control attention and select relevant information. Crucially, attentional mechanisms implicated in controlling access to WM are assumed to be domain-general, yet reports of enhanced attentional abilities in individuals with larger WM capacities are primarily within the visual domain. Here, we directly test the link between WM capacity and early attentional gating across sensory domains, hypothesizing that measures of visual WM capacity should predict an individual's capacity to allocate auditory selective attention. To address this question, auditory ERPs were recorded in a linguistic dichotic listening task, and individual differences in ERP modulations by attention were correlated with estimates of WM capacity obtained in a separate visual change detection task. Auditory selective attention enhanced ERP amplitudes at an early latency (ca. 70–90 msec), with larger P1 components elicited by linguistic probes embedded in an attended narrative. Moreover, this effect was associated with greater individual estimates of visual WM capacity. These findings support the view that domain-general attentional control mechanisms underlie the wide variation of WM capacity across individuals.

scholarly journals The forward testing effect is reliable and independent of learners’ working memory capacity

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernhard Pastötter ◽  
Christian Frings
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Testing Effect ◽  
Retrieval Practice ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

The forward testing effect refers to the finding that retrieval practice of previously studied information enhances learning and retention of subsequently studied other information. While most of the previous research on the forward testing effect examined group differences, the present study took an individual differences approach to investigate this effect. Experiment 1 examined whether the forward effect has test-retest reliability between two experimental sessions. Experiment 2 investigated whether the effect is related to participants’ working memory capacity. In both experiments (and each session of Experiment 1), participants studied three lists of items in anticipation of a final cumulative recall test. In the testing condition, participants were tested immediately on lists 1 and 2, whereas in the restudy condition, they restudied lists 1 and 2. In both conditions, participants were tested immediately on list 3. On the group level, the results of both experiments demonstrated a forward testing effect, with interim testing of lists 1 and 2 enhancing immediate recall of list 3. On the individual level, the results of Experiment 1 showed that the forward effect on list 3 recall has moderate test-retest reliability between two experimental sessions. In addition, the results of Experiment 2 showed that the forward effect on list 3 recall does not depend on participants’ working memory capacity. These findings suggest that the forward testing effect is reliable at the individual level and affects learners at a wide range of working memory capacities alike. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

When High-Powered People Fail

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sian L. Beilock ◽  
Thomas H. Carr
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Mathematical Problem ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Academic Skills ◽  
Superior Performance ◽  
Mathematical Problem Solving ◽  
Choking Under Pressure ◽  
Performance Pressure ◽  
Math Problems

We examined the relation between pressure-induced performance decrements, or “choking under pressure,” in mathematical problem solving and individual differences in working memory capacity. In cognitively based academic skills such as math, pressure is thought to harm performance by reducing the working memory capacity available for skill execution. Results demonstrated that only individuals high in working memory capacity were harmed by performance pressure, and, furthermore, these skill decrements were limited to math problems with the highest demands on working memory capacity. These findings suggest that performance pressure harms individuals most qualified to succeed by consuming the working memory capacity that they rely on for their superior performance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document