Skip to content

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)

Standard

Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes. / Howard, Christina; Pole, Rebekah; Montgomery, Paulina; Woodward, Amanda; Guest, Duncan; Standen, Bradley; Kent, Chris; Crowe, Emily.

In: Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 13.01.2020.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)

Harvard

Howard, C, Pole, R, Montgomery, P, Woodward, A, Guest, D, Standen, B, Kent, C & Crowe, E 2020, 'Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes', Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819897882

APA

Howard, C., Pole, R., Montgomery, P., Woodward, A., Guest, D., Standen, B., Kent, C., & Crowe, E. (2020). Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819897882

Vancouver

Howard C, Pole R, Montgomery P, Woodward A, Guest D, Standen B et al. Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2020 Jan 13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747021819897882

Author

Howard, Christina ; Pole, Rebekah ; Montgomery, Paulina ; Woodward, Amanda ; Guest, Duncan ; Standen, Bradley ; Kent, Chris ; Crowe, Emily. / Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes. In: Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2020.

Bibtex

@article{269c921808204637911ea8ab0f038340,
title = "Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes",
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.",
keywords = "Attention, working memory, spatial vision, multiple object tracking, perceptual lags, temporal processing",
author = "Christina Howard and Rebekah Pole and Paulina Montgomery and Amanda Woodward and Duncan Guest and Bradley Standen and Chris Kent and Emily Crowe",
year = "2020",
month = jan,
day = "13",
doi = "10.1177/1747021819897882",
language = "English",
journal = "Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology",
issn = "1747-0218",
publisher = "Taylor & Francis Group",

}

RIS - suitable for import to EndNote

TY - JOUR

T1 - Visual spatial attention and spatial working memory do not draw on shared capacity-limited core processes

AU - Howard, Christina

AU - Pole, Rebekah

AU - Montgomery, Paulina

AU - Woodward, Amanda

AU - Guest, Duncan

AU - Standen, Bradley

AU - Kent, Chris

AU - Crowe, Emily

PY - 2020/1/13

Y1 - 2020/1/13

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - Attention

KW - working memory

KW - spatial vision

KW - multiple object tracking

KW - perceptual lags

KW - temporal processing

U2 - 10.1177/1747021819897882

DO - 10.1177/1747021819897882

M3 - Article (Academic Journal)

C2 - 31842721

JO - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

JF - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

SN - 1747-0218

ER -