Oculometric indicators of individual differences in preparatory control during the antisaccade task.

Abstract

Individual differences in preparatory control in the antisaccade task were examined in two experiments via an examination of pupillary responses and fixation stability during the preparatory delay. In both experiments, high attention control individuals (high-antisaccade performers) demonstrated larger pupillary responses during the preparatory delay than low attention control individuals (low-antisaccade performers). These results suggest that variation in antisaccade performance were partially due to individual differences in the ability to ramp up and regulate the intensity of attention allocated to preparatory control processes. Additionally, fixation stability, working memory capacity, susceptibility to off-task thinking, and taskspecific motivation were found to correlate with antisaccade performance. Furthermore, both preparatory control and off-task thinking accounted for much of the relation between working memory capacity and antisaccade. These results provide evidence that individual differences in antisaccade performance are multifaceted and that variation in preparatory control (along with other factors) are critically important. Public Significance StatementOur ability to ramp up attention and properly prepare for goal-directed action is important for several everyday tasks. In the current study we demonstrate that individual differences in preparatory control are related to individual differences in performance on the antisaccade task. Individuals who are better able to ramp up and regulate their intensity of attention and more fully engage preparatory control perform better than individuals who are less able to ramp up and regulate their intensity of attention for preparatory control. These results further our understanding of how variation in preparatory control is critical for successful goal-directed action.

Testing locus coeruleus-norepinephrine accounts of working memory, attention control, and fluid intelligence

“…We propose that task-embedded measures of pupillary dynamics carry more meaningful interindividual variance than resting measures of pupil size. Across multiple independent studies, we and others have observed correlations between phasic pupillary responsiveness and individual differences in working memory capacity and attention control (Hood et al, 2022 ; Hutchison et al, 2020 ; Unsworth and Robison, 2015 , 2017b , 2018 ; Robison and Unsworth, 2019 ; Unsworth et al, 2023 ; Unsworth and Robison, 2017b ), and long-term memory (Robison, Trost et al, 2022b ). However, there is limited evidence for a correlation between resting pupil size and working memory (Unsworth et al, 2021a ).…”

Revealing visual working memory operations with pupillometry: Encoding, maintenance, and prioritization

“…Note that another line of work initially suggested that individuals with larger resting-state baseline pupil size (i.e., absolute size during fixation) scored higher in fluid intelligence (Tsukahara et al, 2016;Tsukahara & Engle, 2021a, 2021b. However, no other lab has been able to replicate this findingeven when carefully considering lighting conditions (Coors et al, 2022;Ruuskanen et al, 2023;Unsworth et al, 2023;Unsworth & Miller, 2021). Moreover, there seems to be no relationship between resting-state baseline pupil size and VWM capacity Ruuskanen et al, 2023).…”

“…Many studies have focused on determining how much content can be stored simultaneously (and the format in which representations are stored; Bays et al, 2009;Bays & Husain, 2008;Luck & Vogel, 1997;Van der Stigchel, 2020;Zhang & Luck, 2008). Individual differences in VWM capacity correlate with fluid intelligence, attention control and preparatory oculomotor control, indicating a link between VWM and everyday functioning (Fukuda et al, 2010;Oberauer et al, 2005;Unsworth et al, 2023). Pupillary dynamics have shed light on the neurocognitive underpinnings of VWM capacity by studying individual differences Robison & Brewer, 2020;Robison & Unsworth, 2019;Unsworth & Miller, 2021;Unsworth & Robison, 2018.…”

Processing speed and executive attention as causes of intelligence.

“…For instance, Meier et al (2018) found that goal instantiation, not conflict resolution, helped explain the relationship between working memory capacity and antisaccade task accuracy, a measure often used to assess inhibition. Similarly, participants’ pupillary responses in the preparatory period of an antisaccade task help to explain working memory advantages in antisaccade performance (Unsworth et al, 2023). This finding suggests that higher working memory capacity participants control their attention in the antisaccade task to prepare for upcoming events in the antisaccade task, not merely to resolve conflict (Unsworth et al, 2023; see also Mashburn & Engle, 2023).…”

“…Similarly, participants’ pupillary responses in the preparatory period of an antisaccade task help to explain working memory advantages in antisaccade performance (Unsworth et al, 2023). This finding suggests that higher working memory capacity participants control their attention in the antisaccade task to prepare for upcoming events in the antisaccade task, not merely to resolve conflict (Unsworth et al, 2023; see also Mashburn & Engle, 2023). While we do not abjure studying conflict tasks per se, adopting a broader view of executive attention may prove useful to all those conducting work in this area, particularly when taken in conjunction with some of the other recommendations mentioned.…”