The role of attention control in complex real-world tasks

Draheim, Christopher; Pak, Richard; Draheim, Amanda A.; Engle, Randall W

doi:10.31234/osf.io/9ekpu

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 420 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, some researchers caution against using difference scores because they tend to show low reliabilities (Ackerman & Hambrick, 2020;Draheim et al, 2019Draheim et al, , 2022Hedge et al, 2018;Miller & Ulrich, 2013;von Bastian et al, 2020;Weigard et al, 2021). Von Bastian et al (2020 summarized the reliabilities of 406 measures of executive functions and found that the difference scores of inhibition tasks showed particularly low reliabilities with a mean reliability of .63 and a range from close to zero to close to one, whereas the reliability for shifting difference scores and updating scores were markedly higher (with mean reliabilities of .78).…”

Section: Difference Scores: High Validity or Further Psychometric Con...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The common factor of executive functions measures nothing but speed of information uptake

Löffler¹,

Frischkorn²,

Hagemann³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an ongoing debate about the unity and diversity of executive functions and their relationship with other cognitive abilities such as processing speed, working memory capacity, and intelligence. Specifically, the initially proposed unity and diversity of executive functions is challenged by discussions about (1) the factorial structure of executive functions and (2) unfavorable psychometric properties of measures of executive functions. The present study addressed two methodological limitations of previous work that may explain conflicting results: the inconsistent use of (a) accuracy-based vs. reaction time-based indicators and (b) average performance vs. difference scores. In a sample of 148 participants who completed a battery of executive function tasks, we tried to replicate the three-factor model of the three commonly distinguished executive functions shifting, updating, and inhibition by adopting data-analytical choices of previous work. After addressing the identified methodological limitations using drift-diffusion modeling, we only found one common factor of executive functions that was fully accounted for by individual differences in the speed of information uptake. No variance specific to executive functions remained. Our results suggest that individual differences common to all executive function tasks measure nothing more than individual differences in the speed of information uptake. We therefore suggest to refrain from using typical executive function tasks in applied research, because these tasks are no valid measures of executive functions.

show abstract

Section: Difference Scores: High Validity or Further Psychometric Con...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The common factor of executive functions measures nothing but speed of information uptake

Löffler¹,

Frischkorn²,

Hagemann³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Individual differences in the ability to control attention are correlated with a wide range of important outcomes, from cognitive task performance Conway et al, 2002;Draheim et al, 2021Draheim et al, , 2022Engle et al, 1999;Martin et al, 2020a;McVay & Kane, 2012) and academic achievement (Ahmed et al, 2019;Best et al, 2011) to health behaviors (Allan et al, 2016;Hall et al, 2008) and emotion regulation (Baumeister et al, 2007;Schmeichel & Demaree, 2010;Zelazo & Cunningham, 2007). As such, considerable time and effort has been invested in research on the nature of individual differences in attention control and their measurement (Lezak, 1982;McCabe et al, 2010;Willoughby et al, 2011;Zelazo et al, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nature and Measurement of Attention Control

Burgoyne¹,

Tsukahara²,

Mashburn³

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individual differences in the ability to control attention are correlated with a wide range of important outcomes, from academic achievement and job performance to health behaviors and emotion regulation. Nevertheless, the theoretical nature of attention control as a cognitive construct has been the subject of heated debate, spurred on by psychometric issues that have stymied efforts to reliably measure differences in the ability to control attention. For theory to advance, our measures must improve. We introduce three efficient, reliable, and valid tests of attention control that each take less than three minutes to administer: Stroop Squared, Flanker Squared, and Simon Squared. Two studies (online and in-lab) comprising more than 600 participants demonstrate that the three “Squared” tasks have great internal consistency (avg. = .95) and test-retest reliability across sessions (avg. r = .67). Latent variable analyses revealed that the Squared tasks loaded highly on a common factor, which was strongly correlated with an attention control factor based on established measures (avg. r = .81). Moreover, attention control correlated strongly with fluid intelligence, working memory capacity, and processing speed, and helped explain their covariation. We found that the Squared attention control tasks accounted for 75% of the variance in multitasking ability at the latent level, and that fluid intelligence, attention control, and processing speed fully accounted for individual differences in multitasking ability. Our results suggest that Stroop Squared, Flanker Squared, and Simon Squared are reliable and valid indicators of attention control. The tasks are freely available online.

show abstract

“…For example, ER choice has been replicated using unimodal stimuli (Feldman & Freitas, 2021;Shafir et al, 2018;Sheppes et al, 2011), but real-world stimuli are often multimodal and complex. This relative overabundance of information may negatively influence attentional control, which is one of the most robust predictors of realworld outcomes for cognitive behavior (Draheim et al, 2022). Other approaches have used realworld circumstances (Shafir et al, 2017), but individuals regulating emotion in their daily lives are also often untrained, stimuli are not previewed, and behavior is unprompted (Friedman & Gustavson, 2022).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emotion regulation strategy use and forecasting in response to dynamic, multimodal stimuli

Stasiak

Martinez

Gregory

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Successful emotion regulation requires effective strategy selection. Prior research suggests that low-effort relative to high-effort strategies are more likely to be selected as emotional experiences intensify. However, the extent to which strategy choice reflects strategy usage as circumstances more closely reflect the complications of a complex, multimodal world is not yet well understood. The present research uses a quasi-naturalistic approach to examine the association between affective intensity and strategy usage using untrained participants who were given minimal direction while navigating a haunted house and subsequently reporting emotional states, intensities, and regulation attempts. Studies 1 (n = 47) and 2 (n = 118) found no relationship between emotional intensity and use of high- vs. low effort strategies, which may have been due to the relative underperformance of distraction as an emotion regulation strategy. Study 3 participants (n = 152) predicted regulation strategy usage based on the experiences reported by Study 1 participants, and their forecasts matched the regulatory choice associations reported in prior literature. Though such a quasi-naturalistic approach cannot isolate variable associations like the strategy choice paradigms that laid the groundwork for the field, the pattern of results may highlight differences between emotion regulation choice and usage as research paradigms shift to encompass more naturalistic features within their designs and literature which may explain the observed differences is discussed.

show abstract

The role of attention control in complex real-world tasks

Cited by 10 publications

References 420 publications

The common factor of executive functions measures nothing but speed of information uptake

The common factor of executive functions measures nothing but speed of information uptake

Nature and Measurement of Attention Control

Emotion regulation strategy use and forecasting in response to dynamic, multimodal stimuli

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About