Compensation mechanisms that improve distractor filtering are short-lived

Allon, Ayala S.; Luria, Roy

doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.03.020

Cited by 18 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We did not find consistent correlations between K and estimates of filtering using the EEG neural markers, and therefore we do not further report this measure. The mean visual WM capacity of participants in the current study was low relative to the mean capacity estimates in previous studies from our lab (M = 2.69, SD = 0.72 in Allon & Luria, 2017; M = 2.76, SD = 0.82 in Allon, Vixman, & Luria, 2018; M = 2.70, SD = 0.81 in Vaskevich & Luria, 2018), suggesting that the current group of participants was relatively a low-capacity group.…”

Section: Change-detection Taskcontrasting

confidence: 98%

“…Based on our previous findings (Allon & Luria, 2017), we predicted that, relative to the cue-absent condition, in the cue-present condition the CDA amplitude in the filtering condition would be more similar to the CDA amplitude in a condition that includes the same number of targets (without distractors), reflecting better filtering ability. As for behavioral measures, we predicted that, in accordance with Allon and Luria (2017), the filtering cost (calculated as the difference in accuracy rates between the two targets and the two targets with three distractors condition) will be smaller in the cue-present condition relative to the cueabsent condition.…”

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Filtering performance in visual working memory is improved by reducing early spatial attention to the distractors

Allon

Luria

2019

Psychophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated the underlying processes that enable improving filtering irrelevant items from entering visual working memory (WM). To this end, participants performed a bilateral change‐detection task in which either targets or targets along with distractors (i.e., the filtering condition) appeared in the memory array while ERPs were recorded. In the cue‐present condition, we provided a spatial cue coupled with a temporal cue regarding where and when the distractors would appear. On some of the filtering trials, after the offset of the memory array, task‐irrelevant probes were briefly flashed either at the locations of the targets or at the locations of the distractors. This enabled measuring whether reactivating the filtering settings resulted in reducing spatial attentional resources to the distractors, allocating additional spatial attentional resources to the targets, or both, as was measured by the P1/N1 amplitude. Results revealed that, relative to the cue‐absent condition, in the cue‐present condition the P1/N1 amplitude was reduced for probes at the distractors and was similar for probes at the targets. In addition, the reduction in the P1/N1 amplitude was accompanied by a reduced filtering cost in accuracy performance in the cue‐present condition relative to the cue‐absent condition. These findings suggest that reactivating the distractor filtering settings improved filtering performance in visual WM by reducing the allocation of spatial attention to the distractors already at early processing stages, and not by allocating additional spatial attentional resources to the targets.

show abstract

Section: Change-detection Taskcontrasting

confidence: 98%

Section: The Current Studymentioning

confidence: 92%

Filtering performance in visual working memory is improved by reducing early spatial attention to the distractors

Allon

Luria

2019

Psychophysiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, some researchers have linked WM capacity with filtering: more efficient filtering results in more resources available for processing necessary information (e.g. Allon & Luria, ; Cowan, ; Hasher & Zacks, ; Kane et al., ). Here, we examine whether the development of filtering can also contribute to the development of WM capacity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective attention, filtering, and the development of working memory

Plebanek

Sloutsky

2018

Developmental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selective attention is fundamental for learning across many situations, yet it exhibits protracted development, with young children often failing to filter out distractors. In this research, we examine links between selective attention and working memory (WM) capacity across development. One possibility is that WM is resource‐limited, with development resulting in an increase in the amount of resources available for processing information. However, it is also possible that development results in greater efficiency of using available resources. In the current research, we explore the latter possibility by examining the developmental trajectory of selectivity and filtering in relation to WM capacity. We report that filtering efficiency of adults (N = 30), 7‐year‐olds (N = 29), and 4‐year‐olds (N = 28) was uniquely predictive of WM capacity. We also report that filtering efficiency continues to develop after 7 years of age, whereas WM capacity may reach an asymptote around 7 years of age. The latter finding suggests that selective attention plays a critical role in developmental and individual differences in visual working memory capacity.

show abstract

“…Higher scores indicate that increasing the array by adding distractors that need to be filtered out interfered with performance. Filtering cost is the main measure that has been used in studies of filtering in VWM (Allon & Luria, 2017, 2019Vogel et al, 2005).…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We used a variant of the change-detection task that directly investigates filtering efficiency (Allon & Luria, 2017, 2019Vogel et al, 2005). Each trial in the task started with the presentation of a black fixation sign ("+") in the middle of the screen for 500 ms. Then a display of either three targets, six targets, or three targets and three distractors (i.e., the filtering condition) was presented, in intermixed random order.…”

Section: Filtering Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concrete mindset impairs filtering in visual working memory

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two studies tested whether a mindset manipulation would affect the filtering of distractors from entering visual working memory (VWM). In Study 1, participants completed a concrete mindset manipulation (by repeatedly describing how to perform an action), an abstract mindset manipulation (by repeatedly describing why to perform an action), and a baseline condition (no manipulation). In Study 2, some participants completed a concrete mindset manipulation, whereas others completed an abstract manipulation. Filtering efficiency was estimated by a change-detection task that included a condition with distractors alongside targets. We derived our prediction from construal-level theory (CLT), according to which concrete representations retain information regardless of its relevance, whereas abstract representations retain the relevant and omit the irrelevant elements of an input array. In a task that requires attending to task-relevant targets and ignoring task-irrelevant distractors in a visual array, concrete processing should impair performance relative to abstract processing. We therefore predicted that a concrete mindset would reduce filtering efficiency as compared to an abstract mindset. Consistent with our hypothesis, we found that a concrete mindset manipulation reduced filtering efficiency, as compared to both an abstract mindset manipulation (Studies 1 and 2) and the baseline condition (Study 1). These results suggest a new factor that may contribute to both individual differences and situational variation in working memory performance.

show abstract

Compensation mechanisms that improve distractor filtering are short-lived

Cited by 18 publications

References 54 publications

Filtering performance in visual working memory is improved by reducing early spatial attention to the distractors

Filtering performance in visual working memory is improved by reducing early spatial attention to the distractors

Selective attention, filtering, and the development of working memory

Concrete mindset impairs filtering in visual working memory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About