Memory-guided selective attention: Single experiences with conflict have long-lasting effects on cognitive control.

Brosowsky, Nicholaus P.; Crump, Matthew J. C.

doi:10.1037/xge0000431

Cited by 32 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 116 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such a result lends some insight into how context-specific control might operate in more complex, real-world environments, where there is an over-abundance of environmental features that afford many different learned associations. From a theoretical perspective, this result is consistent memory-based accounts of CSPC phenomena (Brosowsky & Crump, 2018;J. Bugg & Hutchison, 2013;Crump & Milliken, 2009;Crump et al, , 2017.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…This result is usually explained as strategic control, where participants increase attentional control under high-conflict demands and relax attentional control under low-conflict demands (Logan, 1980;Logan & Zbrodoff, 1979;Logan, Zbrodoff, & Williamson, 1984;Lowe & Mitterer, 1982). Recent work however, has demonstrated that attentional control is not only adjusted by top-down regulation, but can also be triggered automatically by environmental cues (Brosowsky & Crump, 2018;J. Bugg & Crump, 2012;Egner, 2014;Fischer & Dreisbach, 2015;King, Korb, & Egner, 2012;Mayr & Bryck, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One explanation for CSPC effects is that the repeated application of attentional priorities in a particular context creates an associative link in episodic memory between the attentional control procedures and the contextual information (Abrahamse, Braem, Notebaert, & Verguts, 2016;Brosowsky & Crump, 2018;Crump, 2016;Egner, 2014). Once the associative link is established, processing the context is assumed to trigger the retrieval of previous experiences, automatically reinstating associated attentional priorities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Contextual recruitment of selective attention can be updated via changes in task-relevance

Brosowsky¹,

Crump²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence across a wide variety of attention paradigms shows that environmental cues can trigger adjustments to ongoing priorities for attending to relevant and irrelevant information. This context-specific control over attention suggests that cognitive control can be both automatic and flexible. For instance, in selective attention tasks, congruency effects are larger for items that appear in a context associated with infrequent conflict than in a context associated with frequent conflict. Since the to-be-presented context cannot be predicted or prepared for in advance, attention is assumed to be rapidly updated on-the-fly, triggered by the currently presented context. Context-specific control exemplifies how learning and memory processes can influence attention to enable cognitive flexibility. However, what determines the use of previously learned associations still remains unclear. In the current study, we examined whether task-relevance would influence the learning and use of context cues in a flanker task. Using a secondary counting task, context dimensions associated with differing levels of conflict were made task-relevant or -irrelevant across the experiment. In short, we found that making new contextual information task-relevant caused participants to ignore a previously learned context-attention association and adopt a new context-specific control strategy; all without changing the experimental stimuli. This result suggests that task-relevance is a key determinant of context-specific control.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contextual recruitment of selective attention can be updated via changes in task-relevance

Brosowsky¹,

Crump²

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some evidence suggests that context-control learning is implicit (Egner, 2014;Musen & Squire, 1993) and may perhaps be considered a form of procedural memory. However, itembased context-control learning effects appear to emerge very swiftly Jacoby, Lindsay, & Hessels, 2003) or with single experiences (Brosowsky & Crump, 2018), which is not a typical characteristic of implicit/procedural learning. It is therefore plausible that control settings can be linked to contextual cues both via cumulative associative learning and via "instance-based" episodic memory processes, and that both of these learning processes might occur at the same time (Hartley & Burgess, 2005), but this possibility has not yet been explored in empirical studies.…”

Section: Remaining Challengesmentioning

confidence: 86%

Cortical and subcortical contributions to context-control learning

Chiu

Egner

2019

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Cognitive control" describes our ability to strategically bias information processing in line with internal goals. Traditionally, research has focused on delineating the sources of top-down biasing, implicating the lateral prefrontal cortex. The past two decades, however, have seen increasing interest in the regulation of control, that is, how learning processes guide the context-sensitive application of top-down biasing. Here, we review and synthesize recent research into the cognitive and neural mechanisms of this type of "context-control learning". We first discuss a fast-growing cognitive psychology literature documenting how specific cognitive control states can become associated with, and subsequently triggered by, contextual cues. We then review neuroimaging studies that speak to the neural substrates of contextual adjustments in control, with a particular focus on recent work that explicitly modeled context-control learning processes. We conclude that these studies suggest an important subcortical extension of the traditional frontal control network, as they indicate a key role for the caudate nucleus in forming associations between contextual cues and appropriate control settings.

show abstract

“…Importantly, more recent work has demonstrated the formation of such stimulus-control associations even for a one-shot, single-exposure pairing of a stimulus and a control state (Brosowsky & Crump, 2018 ; Whitehead et al, 2020 ). This work provides evidence for an episodic memory contribution to control learning, supporting prior studies on the contextual adjustments of cognitive control that have situated their findings within an episodic control-binding framework (Dignath et al, 2019 ; Jiang et al, 2015 ; Spapé & Hommel, 2008 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mind wandering at encoding, but not at retrieval, disrupts one-shot stimulus-control learning

Whitehead

Mahmoud

Seli

et al. 2021

Atten Percept Psychophys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The one-shot pairing of a stimulus with a specific cognitive control process, such as task switching, can bind the two together in memory. The episodic control-binding hypothesis posits that the formation of temporary stimulus-control bindings, which are held in event-files supported by episodic memory, can guide the contextually appropriate application of cognitive control. Across two experiments, we sought to examine the role of task-focused attention in the encoding and implementation of stimulus-control bindings in episodic event-files. In Experiment 1 , we obtained self-reports of mind wandering during encoding and implementation of stimulus-control bindings. Results indicated that, whereas mind wandering during the implementation of stimulus-control bindings does not decrease their efficacy, mind wandering during the encoding of these control-state associations interferes with their successful deployment at a later point. In Experiment 2 , we complemented these results by using trial-by-trial pupillometry to measure attention, again demonstrating that attention levels at encoding predict the subsequent implementation of stimulus-control bindings better than attention levels at implementation. These results suggest that, although encoding stimulus-control bindings in episodic memory requires active attention and engagement, once encoded, these bindings are automatically deployed to guide behavior when the stimulus recurs. These findings expand our understanding of how cognitive control processes are integrated into episodic event files. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.3758/s13414-021-02343-9.

show abstract

Memory-guided selective attention: Single experiences with conflict have long-lasting effects on cognitive control.

Cited by 32 publications

References 116 publications

Contextual recruitment of selective attention can be updated via changes in task-relevance

Contextual recruitment of selective attention can be updated via changes in task-relevance

Cortical and subcortical contributions to context-control learning

Mind wandering at encoding, but not at retrieval, disrupts one-shot stimulus-control learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About