Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes

Howard, CJ ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8755-1109, Pole, R, Montgomery, P, Woodward, A, Guest, D ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4514-9186, Standen, B, Kent, C and Crowe, EM, 2020. Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 73 (5), pp. 799-818. ISSN 1747-0218

Preview

Text 1259694_Howard.pdf - Post-print Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

The extent to which similar capacity limits in visual attention and visual working memory indicate a common shared underlying mechanism is currently still debated. In the spatial domain, the multiple object tracking (MOT) task has been used to assess the relationship between spatial attention and spatial working memory though existing results have been inconclusive. In three dual task experiments we examined the extent of interference between attention to spatial positions and memory for spatial positions. When the position monitoring task required keeping track of target identities through colour-location binding, we found a moderate detrimental effect of position monitoring on spatial working memory and an ambiguous interaction effect. However, when this task requirement was removed, load increases in neither task were detrimental to the other. The only very moderate interference effect that remained resided in an interaction between load types but was not consistent with shared capacity between tasks – rather it was consistent with content-related crosstalk between spatial representations. Contrary to propositions that spatial attention and spatial working memory may draw on a common shared set of core processes, these findings indicate that for a purely spatial task, perceptual attention and working memory appear to recruit separate core capacity-limited processes.

Item Type:	Journal article
Publication Title:	Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Creators:	Howard, C.J., Pole, R., Montgomery, P., Woodward, A., Guest, D., Standen, B., Kent, C. and Crowe, E.M.
Publisher:	Sage
Date:	May 2020
Volume:	73
Number:	5
ISSN:	1747-0218
Identifiers:	Number Type 10.1177/1747021819897882 DOI 1259694 Other
Divisions:	Schools > School of Social Sciences
Record created by:	Jonathan Gallacher
Date Added:	19 Dec 2019 10:55
Last Modified:	26 Jan 2021 16:52
URI:	https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/38890

Actions (login required)

Edit View

Statistics

Views

Downloads