Switching between memory and perception: Moving attention or memory retrieval?

Abstract

Weber, Burt, and Noll (1986) estimated that the time needed to switch attention between memory and perception was around 300 msec. The first two experiments in the present paper estimated switching time using a variation of their task. Subjects reported aloud lists of six items. The items were read ofT a computer screen (perception), recited from memory, or reported alternately from the two sources. The data show that the switching-time estimate is influenced by input/output compatibility, response-initiation times, and memory load. When these factors were controlled, estimated switching time dropped to around 100-150 msec. The data suggest, however, that the switch from perception to memory might be slower than the switch from memory to perception, which would invalidate the formula used to compute switching time. Experiment 3 tested the time for a single switch from perception to memory and a single switch from memory to perception by restricting report to one pair of items in the list. When the to-be-reported pair was precued, estimated switching time dropped to zero. When the pair was not precued, the memory-to-perception switching time remained at zero, but the perception-to-memory time was more than 400 msec. The pattern of results forced a reconceptualization of the task in terms of memory retrieval rather than attention switching. The attention-switching times appear to reflect processes required to select items from memory.Weber, Burt, and Noll (1986) pointed out that many tasks require rapid switching of attention between perception and memory; that is, the tasks are structured so that information in the environment and information in memory must be alternately accessed. Using the workingmemory conceptualization of Baddeley (1982;Baddeley & Hitch, 1974), Weber et al. described a model in which attention switching is the passing of control between memory and perception subroutines. Attention was figuratively described as a switch that could be moved between perceptual information in a visual/spatial scratchpad and memorial information in an articulatory/phonetic scratchpad. Items to which the switch was directed could be accessed by the control processes of working memory and output as responses. When a task required that perceptual and memorial information be intermixed at output, the switch would have to alternate rapidly between the two sources. Weber et al. were interested in the time necessary to accomplish the switch between memory and perception and whether switching required any of the limitedcapacity control processes available to working memory. Weber et al. (1986, Experiment 1) estimated switching time by comparing oral production times for lists of letters three or six items long. All-memory lists of either three or six items were recited aloud after they were silently studied. All-perception lists of either three or six items were read off a computer screen. Mixed lists consisted of a three-item memory sublist and a three-item perception sublist. The subject alternated report of items from ...

Manipulation of working memory information is impaired in Parkinson's disease and related to working memory capacity.

“…For example, Dark (1990) and Garavan (1998) have demonstrated that in normal participants, substantial processing costs are invoked by the requirement to select a particular item within working memory from among several represented elements. Following E. K. Miller (1999), Rowe, Toni, Josephs, Frackowiack, and Passingham (2000) have recently proposed that such "attentional selection" of an item within working memory is a core mechanism underlying executive functions, which is closely related to dorsolateral prefrontal activity.…”

The nature of external representations in problem solving

“…It leaves many things unspecified. For example, it does not give any details on how perceptual and cognitive operations are coordinated, which is an interesting issue worth of further research (for a few studies on this issue, see Carlson et al, 1993;Dark, 1990;Weber et al, 1986).…”

“…Although the central control is crucial for problem solving, the current framework does not attempt to specify its details because it is not the current focus. The most important function of the central control that is unique to ER-based problem solving is the coordination of the interplay between perception and cognition: allocating and switching attention between internal and external representations, integrating internal and external information, and coordinating perceptual and cognitive operations (for a few studies on these issues, see Carlson, Wenger, & Sullivan, 1993;Dark, 1990;Weber, Burd, & Noll, 1986).…”

Serial attention within working memory

“…-Accepted by previous editor, Geoffrey R. Loftus 1981), switches between perceptual stimuli and memorized lists (Carlson, Wenger, & Sullivan, 1993;Dark, 1990;Weber, Burt, & Noll, 1986), and switches between mental or task sets (Jersild, 1927;Laabs & Stager, 1976;Rogers & Monsell, 1995;Spector & Biederman, 1976).…”