Meier Matt E, Smeekens Bridget A, Silvia Paul J, Kwapil Thomas R, Kane Michael J
Department of Psychology, Western Carolina University.
Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2018 Jan;44(1):68-84. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000431. Epub 2017 Jun 22.
The association between working memory capacity (WMC) and the antisaccade task, which requires subjects to move their eyes and attention away from a strong visual cue, supports the claim that WMC is partially an attentional construct (Kane, Bleckley, Conway, & Engle, 2001; Unsworth, Schrock, & Engle, 2004). Specifically, the WMC-antisaccade relation suggests that WMC helps maintain and execute task goals despite interference from habitual actions. Related work has recently shown that mind wandering (McVay & Kane, 2009, 2012a, 2012b) and reaction time (RT) variability (Unsworth, 2015) are also related to WMC and they partially explain WMC's prediction of cognitive abilities. Here, we tested whether mind-wandering propensity and intraindividual RT variation account for WMC's associations with 2 antisaccade-cued choice RT tasks. In addition, we asked whether any influences of WMC, mind wandering, or intraindividual RT variation on antisaccade are moderated by (a) the temporal gap between fixation and the flashing location cue, and (b) whether targets switch sides on consecutive trials. Our quasi-experimental study reexamined a published dataset (Kane et al., 2016) comprising 472 subjects who completed 6 WMC tasks, 5 attentional tasks with mind-wandering probes, 5 tasks from which we measured intraindividual RT variation, and 2 antisaccade tasks with varying fixation-cue gap durations. The WMC-antisaccade association was not accounted for by mind wandering or intraindividual RT variation. WMC's effects on antisaccade performance were greater with longer fixation-to-cue intervals, suggesting that goal activation processes-beyond the ability to control mind wandering and RT variability-are partially responsible for the WMC-antisaccade relation. (PsycINFO Database Record
工作记忆容量(WMC)与反眼跳任务之间的关联支持了这样一种观点,即WMC在一定程度上是一种注意力结构。反眼跳任务要求受试者将眼睛和注意力从强烈的视觉线索上移开(Kane、Bleckley、Conway和Engle,2001年;Unsworth、Schrock和Engle,2004年)。具体而言,WMC与反眼跳任务的关系表明,尽管存在习惯性动作的干扰,WMC仍有助于维持和执行任务目标。相关研究最近表明,走神(McVay和Kane,2009年、2012a、2012b)和反应时(RT)变异性(Unsworth,2015年)也与WMC相关,并且它们部分解释了WMC对认知能力的预测。在此,我们测试了走神倾向和个体内RT变化是否能解释WMC与两个反眼跳提示选择RT任务之间的关联。此外,我们还询问了WMC、走神或个体内RT变化对反眼跳的任何影响是否会受到以下因素的调节:(a)注视点与闪烁位置线索之间的时间间隔,以及(b)目标在连续试验中是否切换位置。我们的准实验研究重新审视了一个已发表的数据集(Kane等人,2016年),该数据集包含472名受试者,他们完成了6项WMC任务、5项带有走神探测的注意力任务、5项我们测量个体内RT变化的任务,以及2项具有不同注视-线索间隔持续时间的反眼跳任务。WMC与反眼跳任务之间的关联无法通过走神或个体内RT变化来解释。随着注视-线索间隔时间的延长,WMC对反眼跳表现的影响更大,这表明目标激活过程——超出控制走神和RT变异性的能力——在一定程度上导致了WMC与反眼跳任务之间的关系。(PsycINFO数据库记录