Visual working memory load plays limited, to no role in encoding distractor objects during visual search

Lavelle, Mark; Alonso, David; Luria, Roy; Drew, Trafton

doi:10.1080/13506285.2021.1914256

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A sample size of 48 would be 80% powered to detect an effect size down to d = 0.45. These calculations were made under the assumption of a repeated-measures correlation for recognition across conditions of r = .4 (based on unpublished results from Lavelle et al, 2021).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Search for more targets leads to recognition of a greater proportion of distractors. Measures of cumulative fixation on distractors throughout the many trials in which they appeared, referred to as “dwell time,” have repeatedly shown a correlation between the chance of recognizing a distractor and the time previously spent dwelling on it (Hout & Goldinger, 2012; Lavelle et al, 2021; Thomas & Williams, 2014; Williams, 2010a; Williams et al, 2005). In turn, the distractors that most resemble targets attract the most attention (Alexander & Zelinsky, 2011, 2012; Thomas & Williams, 2014; Williams, 2010a, 2010b; Williams et al, 2005).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Instead of eye tracking, we assessed attention via incidental recognition of distractors based on well-replicated associations of cumulative fixation time and subsequent recognition (Hout & Goldinger, 2012; Lavelle et al, 2021; Thomas & Williams, 2014; Williams, 2010a; Williams et al, 2005). Subsequent recognition of distractors would indicate the relative influence of target number versus variety on distractor processing during search.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Incidental recognition reveals attentional tradeoffs shaped by categorical similarity.

Lavelle¹,

Luria²,

Drew³

2023

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Search efficiency suffers when observers look for multiple targets or a single imprecisely defined target. These conditions prevent a narrow target template, resulting in improved delayed distractor recognition. In our first experiment with hybrid visual and memory search, we investigated the interaction of target variety and target number on search efficiency. Results supported the hypothesis that numerous targets impair search efficiency much more when targets are unrelated. These efficiency impairments were linked to distractor processing, indicated by increased delayed recognition. A second experiment manipulated target–distractor similarity to determine whether prioritization of target-defining features is totally eliminated in search for eight unrelated targets. For related and unrelated targets alike, recognition declined for distractors bearing less resemblance to targets and more to each other. This suggests templates for unrelated targets successfully prioritize relevant features at some stage of attention. Avoidance of random distractors was stronger when targets were related, at the price of slower, more error-prone identification of within-category distractors. Within-category processing difficulty for related targets likely stems from categorical interference as previously demonstrated in recognition memory. Thus, target variety versus homogeneity afforded different advantages and limitations depending on target number, target–distractor, and distractor–distractor resemblance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incidental recognition reveals attentional tradeoffs shaped by categorical similarity.

Lavelle¹,

Luria²,

Drew³

2023

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 21 , 32 In an IT-filled office, older employees are less productive in terms of coding because their limited mental resources make it easier for them to be distracted. It can also be expected that the older an employee is, the lower working memory capacity related to information technology he or she possesses 12 , 34 —ie, the older an employee is, the greater the negative impact on his or her working memory capacity. In addition, based on the concept of working memory capacity, in a working environment surrounded by information technology, the greater an employee’s working memory capacity, the more information he or she can store, which is more conducive to the completion of work tasks.…”

Section: Research Hypotheses and Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, based on the concept of working memory capacity, in a working environment surrounded by information technology, the greater an employee’s working memory capacity, the more information he or she can store, which is more conducive to the completion of work tasks. 34 , 35 In summary, increasing age in employees leads to gradual cognitive aging, which in turn affects working memory capacity and eventually reduces performance at work. Based on the above analysis, the following hypotheses can be formulated.…”

Section: Research Hypotheses and Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moderating Effects of Self-Efficacy and Time Pressure on the Relationship Between Employee Aging and Work Performance

Li¹,

Liu²,

Zhang³

et al. 2022

PRBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The relationships among employee aging, working memory capacity, and task performance in the context of information technology were studied, and these investigations in turn provide insight into improving employee task performance and mitigating the negative effects of employee aging. Participants and Methods Based on the limited resource theory and the inhibitory deficit theory, a total of 296 valid questionnaires were collected and the relationships among the variables were examined using cascaded linear regression via SPSS 22.0. Results Aging negatively affects working memory capacity and task performance. Working memory capacity partially mediates the relationship between age and task performance. Time pressure can exacerbate the negative effects of age on task performance, and self-efficacy mitigates the negative effects of age on task performance. Discussion Employee information system learning and training can be enhanced to ameliorate the negative impact of aging on task performance. IT-related work can be limited to a manageable level to reduce the negative effects of reduced working memory capacity. Employees’ internal motivation can be gradually cultivated, and employees can be guided toward the improvement of their IT self-efficacy.

show abstract

Memory after visual search: Overlapping phonology, shared meaning, and bilingual experience influence what we remember

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual working memory load plays limited, to no role in encoding distractor objects during visual search

Cited by 9 publications

References 51 publications

Incidental recognition reveals attentional tradeoffs shaped by categorical similarity.

Incidental recognition reveals attentional tradeoffs shaped by categorical similarity.

Moderating Effects of Self-Efficacy and Time Pressure on the Relationship Between Employee Aging and Work Performance

Memory after visual search: Overlapping phonology, shared meaning, and bilingual experience influence what we remember

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About