Complex working memory span tasks and higher-order cognition: A latent-variable analysis of the relationship between processing and storage. Memory, 17(6), 635-654.

Studies examining individual differences in working memory capacity have suggested that individuals with low working memory capacities demonstrate impaired performance on a variety of attention and memory tasks compared with individuals with high working memory capacities. This working memory limitation can be conceived of as arising from 2 components: a dynamic attention component (primary memory) and a probabilistic cue-dependent search component (secondary memory). This framework is used to examine previous individual differences studies of working memory capacity, and new evidence is examined on the basis of predictions of the framework to performance on immediate free recall. It is suggested that individual differences in working memory capacity are partially due to the ability to maintain information accessible in primary memory and the ability to search for information from secondary memory.

Research has suggested that short-term memory and working memory (as measured by simple and complex span tasks, respectively) are separate constructs that are differentially related to higher order cognitive abilities. This claim is critically evaluated by reviewing research that has compared simple and complex span tasks in both experimental and correlational studies. In addition, a meta-analysis and re-analyses of key data sets were conducted. The review and analyses suggest that simple and complex span tasks largely measure the same basic subcomponent processes (e.g., rehearsal, maintenance, updating, controlled search) but differ in the extent to which these processes operate in a particular task. These differences largely depend on the extent to which phonological processes are maximized and variability from long list lengths is present. Potential methodological, psychometric, and assessment implications are discussed and a theoretical account of the data is proposed.

Several theories have been put forth to explain the relation between working memory (WM) and gF. Unfortunately, no single factor has been shown to fully account for the relation between these two important constructs. In the current study we tested whether multiple factors (capacity, attention control, and secondary memory) would collectively account for the relation. A large number of participants performed multiple measures of each construct and latent variable analyses were used to examine the data. The results demonstrated that capacity, attention control, and secondary memory were uniquely related to WM storage, WM processing, and gF. Importantly, the three factors completely accounted for the relation between WM (both processing and storage) and gF. Thus, although storage and processing make independent contributions to gF, both of these contributions are accounted for by variation in capacity, attention control and secondary memory. These results are consistent with the multifaceted view of WM, suggesting that individual differences in capacity, attention control, and secondary memory jointly account for individual differences in WM and its relation with gF.

The current study examined the extent to which pupillary responses (both pretrial baseline and phasic responses) would accurately track lapses of attention as predicted by theories of locus coeruleus norepinephrine (LC-NE) functioning. Participants performed a sustained attention task while pupil responses were continuously recorded. Periodically during the task, participants were presented with thought probes to determine if they were on or off task. The results suggested the pupillary responses accurately distinguished on from off-task states. Importantly, pretrial baseline pupil responses distinguished different types of lapses of attention, with inattentive and mind-wandering states being associated with small pretrial baseline pupil diameters on average and distracted states being associated with larger pretrial baseline pupil diameters on average compared to focused states. These results support the notion that pupil diameter is sensitive to different types of lapses of attention which may be associated with different LC-NE modes. Keywords Cognitive control . Norephinephrine . AttentionThe ability to focus and sustain attention on task-relevant information is a critically important skill that is needed in a host of everyday activities. Despite the importance of focusing and sustaining attention on goal-relevant information, sometimes the attention system falters, leading to lapses. Understanding these lapses, whereby attention is disengaged from the current task and focused on other external distracting stimuli or internal thoughts (daydreaming), is important for understanding how and when attentional processes falter in both the laboratory and in real-world situations (Reason, 1984). For example, the ability to focus attention is needed in a host of activities where any lapses of attention could result in unwanted outcomes, such driving accidents, lower academic performance, and failures to spot weapons during baggage screening (Reason, 1990;Unsworth, McMillan, Brewer, & Spillers, 2012). Gaining a better understanding of fluctuations in attention is important for understanding the attentional system more broadly and for predicting when and for whom attention failures are most likely.