Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
In 2 experiments the authors examined whether individual differences in working-memory (WM) capacity are related to attentional control. Experiment 1 tested high- and low-WM-span (high-span and low-span) participants in a prosaccade task, in which a visual cue appeared in the same location as a subsequent to-be-identified target letter, and in an antisaccade task, in which a target appeared opposite the cued location. Span groups identified targets equally well in the prosaccade task, reflecting equivalence in automatic orienting. However, low-span participants were slower and less accurate than high-span participants in the antisaccade task, reflecting differences in attentional control. Experiment 2 measured eye movements across a long antisaccade session. Low-span participants made slower and more erroneous saccades than did high-span participants. In both experiments, low-span participants performed poorly when task switching from antisaccade to prosaccade blocks. The findings support a controlled-attention view of WM capacity.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Michael J. Kane
M. Kathryn Bleckley
Andrew R. A. Conway
Journal of Experimental Psychology General
University of North Carolina at Greensboro
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Kane et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69d72a59b815ed77c2bef10e — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.169