An updating-based working memory load alters the dynamics of eye movements but not their spatial extent during free viewing of natural scenes
-
Published:2023-07-19
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:1943-3921
-
Container-title:Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Atten Percept Psychophys
Author:
Wyche Nicholas J.ORCID, Edwards Mark, Goodhew Stephanie C.
Abstract
AbstractThe relationship between spatial deployments of attention and working memory load is an important topic of study, with clear implications for real-world tasks such as driving. Previous research has generally shown that attentional breadth broadens under higher load, while exploratory eye-movement behaviour also appears to change with increasing load. However, relatively little research has compared the effects of working memory load on different kinds of spatial deployment, especially in conditions that require updating of the contents of working memory rather than simple retrieval. The present study undertook such a comparison by measuring participants’ attentional breadth (via an undirected Navon task) and their exploratory eye-movement behaviour (a free-viewing recall task) under low and high updating working memory loads. While spatial aspects of task performance (attentional breadth, and peripheral extent of image exploration in the free-viewing task) were unaffected by the load manipulation, the exploratory dynamics of the free-viewing task (including fixation durations and scan-path lengths) changed under increasing load. These findings suggest that temporal dynamics, rather than the spatial extent of exploration, are the primary mechanism affected by working memory load during the spatial deployment of attention. Further, individual differences in exploratory behaviour were observed on the free-viewing task: all metrics were highly correlated across working memory load blocks. These findings suggest a need for further investigation of individual differences in eye-movement behaviour; potential factors associated with these individual differences, including working memory capacity and persistence versus flexibility orientations, are discussed.
Funder
Australian National University
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Sensory Systems,Language and Linguistics,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
Reference98 articles.
1. Ahmed, L., & de Fockert, J. W. (2012). Focusing on attention: the effects of working memory capacity and load on selective attention. Plos One, 7(8), e43101. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0043101 2. Ahmed, L., & de Fockert, J. W. (2012). Working memory load can both improve and impair selective attention: Evidence from the Navon paradigm. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(7), 1397–1405. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0357-1 3. Andraszewicz, S., Scheibehenne, B., Rieskamp, J., Grasman, R., Verhagen, J., & Wagenmakers, E.-J. (2014). An Introduction to Bayesian Hypothesis Testing for Management Research. Journal of Management, 41(2), 521–543. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206314560412 4. Bar, M., Kassam, K. S., Ghuman, A. S., Boshyan, J., Schmid, A. M., Dale, A. M., Hämäläinen, M. S., Marinkovic, K., Schacter, D. L., Rosen, B. R., & Halgren, E. (2006). Top-down facilitation of visual recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(2), 449–454. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507062103 5. Bledowski, C., Rahm, B., & Rowe, J. B. (2009). What “works” in working memory? Separate systems for selection and updating of critical information. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(43), 13735–13741. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.2547-09.2009
|
|