Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference
Emerging literature indicates that working memory and attention interact in determining what is retained over time, though the nature of this relationship and the impacts on performance across different task contexts remain to be mapped. In the present study, four experiments examined whether partic...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Attention, perception & psychophysics perception & psychophysics, 2018-10, Vol.80 (7), p.1731-1743 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1743 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 1731 |
container_title | Attention, perception & psychophysics |
container_volume | 80 |
creator | Allen, Richard J. Ueno, Taiji |
description | Emerging literature indicates that working memory and attention interact in determining what is retained over time, though the nature of this relationship and the impacts on performance across different task contexts remain to be mapped. In the present study, four experiments examined whether participants can prioritize one or more high-reward items within a four-item target array for the purposes of an immediate cued recall task, and the extent to which this mediates the disruptive impact of a postdisplay to-be-ignored suffix. All four experiments indicated that endogenous direction of attention toward high-reward items results in their improved recall. Furthermore, increasing the number of high-reward items from one to three (Experiments
1
–
3
) produces no decline in recall performance for those items, while associating each item in an array with a different reward value results in correspondingly graded levels of recall performance (Experiment
4
). These results suggest the ability to exert precise voluntary control in the prioritization of multiple targets. However, in line with recent outcomes drawn from serial visual memory, this endogenously driven focus on high-reward items results in greater susceptibility to exogenous suffix interference, relative to low-reward items. This contrasts with outcomes from cueing paradigms, indicating that different methods of attentional direction may not always result in equivalent outcomes on working memory performance. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2063711070</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2259302207</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-c8c7fdf00f59c1b401f8c68df8999ccb7fb05e2a55632ed8d73d345afe16cafa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtr3DAUhUVoyKv5AdkUQTfduNHDsqVlCWkbmJJNAt0JWb6a0dSWp5KcYfLrozBJCoWsdNH9zpE4B6ELSr7yVsjLRHlN64pQWVFR86o5QCdUlYEr_vvD28zoMTpNaU1Iw5uWHKFjplQjiaxPUPg1D9lvBsArv1xVEbYm9thnGBO2JuAO8Cb6KfrsH6EsAt5O8Y8PSzzCOMUd7uaMtz6v8DKCyRDxwzwEiKbzg887nKeiKdcOIgQLH9GhM0OC85fzDN1_v767-lktbn_cXH1bVLamIldW2tb1jhAnlKVdTaiTtpG9k0opa7vWdUQAM0I0nEEv-5b3vBbGAW2scYafoS97302c_s6Qsh59sjAMJsA0J81KFC2lpCUF_fwfup7mGMrvNGNCccIYaQtF95SNU0oRnC6xjCbuNCX6uQy9L0OXMvRzGbopmk8vznM3Qv-meE2_AGwPpLIKS4j_nn7f9QllwZcs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2259302207</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference</title><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Allen, Richard J. ; Ueno, Taiji</creator><creatorcontrib>Allen, Richard J. ; Ueno, Taiji</creatorcontrib><description>Emerging literature indicates that working memory and attention interact in determining what is retained over time, though the nature of this relationship and the impacts on performance across different task contexts remain to be mapped. In the present study, four experiments examined whether participants can prioritize one or more high-reward items within a four-item target array for the purposes of an immediate cued recall task, and the extent to which this mediates the disruptive impact of a postdisplay to-be-ignored suffix. All four experiments indicated that endogenous direction of attention toward high-reward items results in their improved recall. Furthermore, increasing the number of high-reward items from one to three (Experiments
1
–
3
) produces no decline in recall performance for those items, while associating each item in an array with a different reward value results in correspondingly graded levels of recall performance (Experiment
4
). These results suggest the ability to exert precise voluntary control in the prioritization of multiple targets. However, in line with recent outcomes drawn from serial visual memory, this endogenously driven focus on high-reward items results in greater susceptibility to exogenous suffix interference, relative to low-reward items. This contrasts with outcomes from cueing paradigms, indicating that different methods of attentional direction may not always result in equivalent outcomes on working memory performance.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1943-3921</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-393X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29968084</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Arrays ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Cognitive Psychology ; Cues ; Experimental psychology ; Experiments ; Memorization ; Memory ; Neurosciences ; Predictive Validity ; Psychology ; Recall (Psychology) ; Serial Ordering ; Short Term Memory ; Stimuli ; Validity ; Visual Environment ; Visual Stimuli</subject><ispartof>Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2018-10, Vol.80 (7), p.1731-1743</ispartof><rights>The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018</rights><rights>Copyright Springer Nature B.V. Oct 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-c8c7fdf00f59c1b401f8c68df8999ccb7fb05e2a55632ed8d73d345afe16cafa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-c8c7fdf00f59c1b401f8c68df8999ccb7fb05e2a55632ed8d73d345afe16cafa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29968084$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Allen, Richard J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ueno, Taiji</creatorcontrib><title>Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference</title><title>Attention, perception & psychophysics</title><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><description>Emerging literature indicates that working memory and attention interact in determining what is retained over time, though the nature of this relationship and the impacts on performance across different task contexts remain to be mapped. In the present study, four experiments examined whether participants can prioritize one or more high-reward items within a four-item target array for the purposes of an immediate cued recall task, and the extent to which this mediates the disruptive impact of a postdisplay to-be-ignored suffix. All four experiments indicated that endogenous direction of attention toward high-reward items results in their improved recall. Furthermore, increasing the number of high-reward items from one to three (Experiments
1
–
3
) produces no decline in recall performance for those items, while associating each item in an array with a different reward value results in correspondingly graded levels of recall performance (Experiment
4
). These results suggest the ability to exert precise voluntary control in the prioritization of multiple targets. However, in line with recent outcomes drawn from serial visual memory, this endogenously driven focus on high-reward items results in greater susceptibility to exogenous suffix interference, relative to low-reward items. This contrasts with outcomes from cueing paradigms, indicating that different methods of attentional direction may not always result in equivalent outcomes on working memory performance.</description><subject>Arrays</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Cues</subject><subject>Experimental psychology</subject><subject>Experiments</subject><subject>Memorization</subject><subject>Memory</subject><subject>Neurosciences</subject><subject>Predictive Validity</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Recall (Psychology)</subject><subject>Serial Ordering</subject><subject>Short Term Memory</subject><subject>Stimuli</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Visual Environment</subject><subject>Visual Stimuli</subject><issn>1943-3921</issn><issn>1943-393X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kUtr3DAUhUVoyKv5AdkUQTfduNHDsqVlCWkbmJJNAt0JWb6a0dSWp5KcYfLrozBJCoWsdNH9zpE4B6ELSr7yVsjLRHlN64pQWVFR86o5QCdUlYEr_vvD28zoMTpNaU1Iw5uWHKFjplQjiaxPUPg1D9lvBsArv1xVEbYm9thnGBO2JuAO8Cb6KfrsH6EsAt5O8Y8PSzzCOMUd7uaMtz6v8DKCyRDxwzwEiKbzg887nKeiKdcOIgQLH9GhM0OC85fzDN1_v767-lktbn_cXH1bVLamIldW2tb1jhAnlKVdTaiTtpG9k0opa7vWdUQAM0I0nEEv-5b3vBbGAW2scYafoS97302c_s6Qsh59sjAMJsA0J81KFC2lpCUF_fwfup7mGMrvNGNCccIYaQtF95SNU0oRnC6xjCbuNCX6uQy9L0OXMvRzGbopmk8vznM3Qv-meE2_AGwPpLIKS4j_nn7f9QllwZcs</recordid><startdate>20181001</startdate><enddate>20181001</enddate><creator>Allen, Richard J.</creator><creator>Ueno, Taiji</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181001</creationdate><title>Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference</title><author>Allen, Richard J. ; Ueno, Taiji</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c415t-c8c7fdf00f59c1b401f8c68df8999ccb7fb05e2a55632ed8d73d345afe16cafa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Arrays</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Cues</topic><topic>Experimental psychology</topic><topic>Experiments</topic><topic>Memorization</topic><topic>Memory</topic><topic>Neurosciences</topic><topic>Predictive Validity</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Recall (Psychology)</topic><topic>Serial Ordering</topic><topic>Short Term Memory</topic><topic>Stimuli</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Visual Environment</topic><topic>Visual Stimuli</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Allen, Richard J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ueno, Taiji</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Attention, perception & psychophysics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Allen, Richard J.</au><au>Ueno, Taiji</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference</atitle><jtitle>Attention, perception & psychophysics</jtitle><stitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</stitle><addtitle>Atten Percept Psychophys</addtitle><date>2018-10-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>80</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1731</spage><epage>1743</epage><pages>1731-1743</pages><issn>1943-3921</issn><eissn>1943-393X</eissn><abstract>Emerging literature indicates that working memory and attention interact in determining what is retained over time, though the nature of this relationship and the impacts on performance across different task contexts remain to be mapped. In the present study, four experiments examined whether participants can prioritize one or more high-reward items within a four-item target array for the purposes of an immediate cued recall task, and the extent to which this mediates the disruptive impact of a postdisplay to-be-ignored suffix. All four experiments indicated that endogenous direction of attention toward high-reward items results in their improved recall. Furthermore, increasing the number of high-reward items from one to three (Experiments
1
–
3
) produces no decline in recall performance for those items, while associating each item in an array with a different reward value results in correspondingly graded levels of recall performance (Experiment
4
). These results suggest the ability to exert precise voluntary control in the prioritization of multiple targets. However, in line with recent outcomes drawn from serial visual memory, this endogenously driven focus on high-reward items results in greater susceptibility to exogenous suffix interference, relative to low-reward items. This contrasts with outcomes from cueing paradigms, indicating that different methods of attentional direction may not always result in equivalent outcomes on working memory performance.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>29968084</pmid><doi>10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6</doi><tpages>13</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1943-3921 |
ispartof | Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2018-10, Vol.80 (7), p.1731-1743 |
issn | 1943-3921 1943-393X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2063711070 |
source | Alma/SFX Local Collection; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Arrays Behavioral Science and Psychology Cognitive Psychology Cues Experimental psychology Experiments Memorization Memory Neurosciences Predictive Validity Psychology Recall (Psychology) Serial Ordering Short Term Memory Stimuli Validity Visual Environment Visual Stimuli |
title | Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T04%3A54%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Multiple%20high-reward%20items%20can%20be%20prioritized%20in%20working%20memory%20but%20with%20greater%20vulnerability%20to%20interference&rft.jtitle=Attention,%20perception%20&%20psychophysics&rft.au=Allen,%20Richard%20J.&rft.date=2018-10-01&rft.volume=80&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1731&rft.epage=1743&rft.pages=1731-1743&rft.issn=1943-3921&rft.eissn=1943-393X&rft_id=info:doi/10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2259302207%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2259302207&rft_id=info:pmid/29968084&rfr_iscdi=true |