Individual working memory capacity is uniquely correlated with feature-based attention when combined with spatial attention.
A growing literature suggests that working memory and attention are closely related constructs. Both involve the selection of task-relevant information, and both are characterized by capacity limits. Furthermore, studies using a variety of methodological approaches have demonstrated convergent working memory and attention-related processing at the individual, neural and behavioral level. Given the varieties of both constructs, the specific kinds of attention and WM must be considered. We find that individuals' working memory capacity (WMC) uniquely interacts with feature-based attention when combined with spatial attention in a cuing paradigm (Posner, 1980). Our findings suggest a positive correlation between WM and feature-based attention only within the spotlight of spatial attention. This finding lends support to the controlled attention view of working memory by demonstrating that integrated feature-based expectancies are uniquely correlated with individual performance on a working memory task.
Center for Mind and Brain, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA, USA. jjbengson@ucdavis.edu
Jesse J
JJ
Bengson
George R
GR
Mangun
D001288:Attention; D015350:Contrast Sensitivity; D003463:Cues; D004192:Discrimination, Psychological; D006801:Humans; D007206:Individuality; D008570:Memory, Short-Term; D009949:Orientation; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual; D011601:Psychophysics; D011930:Reaction Time; D012718:Set, Psychology; D013028:Space Perception; D013223:Statistics as Topic
Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Apr;11(2):269-74
15260192
Psychol Rev. 1990 Oct;97(4):523-47
2247540
Mem Cognit. 2002 Mar;30(2):294-301
12035891
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1998 Feb 3;95(3):781-7
9448241
Neuron. 1999 Aug;23(4):747-64
10482241
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2006 Jul;32(4):749-77
16822145
Q J Exp Psychol A. 1996 Nov;49(4):940-9
8962542
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2009 Aug;35(4):1140-60
19653755
Trends Cogn Sci. 2003 Apr;7(4):166-172
12691765
Nat Neurosci. 2008 Jan;11(1):5-6
18160954
J Neurosci. 1999 Nov 1;19(21):9480-96
10531451
Psychophysiology. 1995 Jan;32(1):4-18
7878167
Psychol Sci. 2001 May;12(3):219-24
11437304
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003 Oct;4(10):829-39
14523382
Science. 1995 Nov 3;270(5237):802-5
7481770
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001 Jun;130(2):169-83
11409097
Percept Psychophys. 2000 Jan;62(1):175-86
10703265
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1998 Jun;24(3):780-90
9627416
Annu Rev Neurosci. 1995;18:193-222
7605061
Nature. 1997 Nov 20;390(6657):279-81
9384378
Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1994 Apr;4(2):157-65
8038571
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1990 Aug;16(3):459-78
2144564
Neuropsychologia. 2008;46(7):2071-8
18355882
J Neurosci. 2003 Jun 1;23(11):4689-99
12805308
Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Feb;24(1):87-114; discussion 114-85
11515286
Cereb Cortex. 2007 Sep;17 Suppl 1:i118-24
17725994
Hum Brain Mapp. 1998;6(4):216-38
9704262
Psychon Bull Rev. 2001 Jun;8(2):331-5
11495122
Cereb Cortex. 1996 Jan-Feb;6(1):39-49
8670637
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2007 Nov;136(4):663-84
17999578
Neuron. 2005 Sep 1;47(5):637-43
16129394
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2001 Apr;27(2):303-17
11318049
Q J Exp Psychol. 1980 Feb;32(1):3-25
7367577
J Neurosci. 2009 Jul 8;29(27):8726-33
19587279
Behav Res Methods. 2005 Aug;37(3):498-505
16405146
Nat Neurosci. 2009 Jan;12(1):24-5
19029890
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 Jul;33(4):645-62
17576145
Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Apr;11(2):275-81
15260193
Cogn Psychol. 1980 Jan;12(1):97-136
7351125
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2003 Mar;132(1):47-70
12656297
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Jul;62(7):1430-54
19123118
Psychon Bull Rev. 2007 Dec;14(6):1051-7
18229474
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Oct 20;106(42):17974-9
19805050
Psychon Bull Rev. 2003 Dec;10(4):884-9
15000535
Brain. 1997 Nov;120 ( Pt 11):2013-28
9397018
Percept Psychophys. 1994 Aug;56(2):183-97
7971119
J Neurosci. 2009 Mar 25;29(12):3930-8
19321789
Nature. 2005 Nov 24;438(7067):500-3
16306992