본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

How Working Memory Capacity Relates to Top-Down and Bottom-Up Components of the Trial-by-trial Modulation of the Simon Effect

손명호|태진이|Rebecca B. Weldon|Eva Zita Patai
한국인지및생물심리학회 (Korean Society For Cognitive and Biological Psychology)|2021.04|한국심리학회지: 인지 및 생물 (Korean Journal of Cognitive and Biological Psychology)|제33권 제2호|pp. 95-106|DOI 10.22172/cogbio.2021.33.2.002

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

cognitive controlworking memory작업 기억individual difference개인차conflict adaptationSimon task갈등 순응사이먼 과제인지 통제
주제분류심리과학

초록

The conflict effect is typically smaller following incongruent than congruent trials, and this trial-by-trial modulation has been interpreted as evidence for increased top-down control for efficient selection of task-relevant information. An alternative explanation suggests that this modulation is due to bottom-up feature integration, the notion that stimulus and response features from one trial are automatically bound in an event file. Therefore, complete repetition or alternation of stimulus and response features across trials results in better performance than partial repetition of features, since the latter requires unbinding of the event file from the previous trial. In the present study, using the Simon task, we examined how working memory capacity (WMC) is related to the top-down and bottom-up components of the modulation of the conflict effect. We found that: 1) WMC was negatively correlated with the trial-by-trial Simon effect on partial repetition trials, the portion that reflects top-down control processing. 2) WMC was not associated with the Simon effect of complete repetitions and alternations, the portion that reflects bottom-up processing. 3) Medium and high WMC individuals may be using a different strategy than low WMC individuals. In combination, our findings lend insight into factors that may relate to the trial-by-trial modulation of the Simon effect. Implications for these findings are discussed.

Abstract

The conflict effect is typically smaller following incongruent than congruent trials, and this trial-by-trial modulation has been interpreted as evidence for increased top-down control for efficient selection of task-relevant information. An alternative explanation suggests that this modulation is due to bottom-up feature integration, the notion that stimulus and response features from one trial are automatically bound in an event file. Therefore, complete repetition or alternation of stimulus and response features across trials results in better performance than partial repetition of features, since the latter requires unbinding of the event file from the previous trial. In the present study, using the Simon task, we examined how working memory capacity (WMC) is related to the top-down and bottom-up components of the modulation of the conflict effect. We found that: 1) WMC was negatively correlated with the trial-by-trial Simon effect on partial repetition trials, the portion that reflects top-down control processing. 2) WMC was not associated with the Simon effect of complete repetitions and alternations, the portion that reflects bottom-up processing. 3) Medium and high WMC individuals may be using a different strategy than low WMC individuals. In combination, our findings lend insight into factors that may relate to the trial-by-trial modulation of the Simon effect. Implications for these findings are discussed.

참고문헌 (37)

  1. Akçay, Ç., "Conflict monitoring and feature overlap : Two sources of sequential modulations", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(4), pp.742~748 (2007)
  2. Akçay, Ç., "Domain-specific conflict adaptation without feature repetitions", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(3), pp.505~511 (2011)
  3. Botvinick, M. M., "Conflict monitoring and cognitive control", Psychological Review, 108, pp.624~652 (2001)
  4. Braem, S., "Measuring adaptive control in conflict tasks", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(9), pp.769~783 (2019)
  5. Braem, S., "Punishment sensitivity predicts the impact of punishment on cognitive control", PloS One, 8(9), pp.e74106~ (2013)
  6. Carver, C. S., "Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment : the BIS", BAS scales, 1994, pp.67(2), 319~333
  7. Colflesh, G. J. H., "Individual differences in working memory capacity and divided attention in dichotic listening", Psychonomic Bulletin &Review, 14, pp.699~703 (2007)
  8. Davelaar, E. J., "Sequential dependencies in the Eriksen flanker task : A direct comparison of two competing accounts", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(1), pp.121~126 (2009)
  9. Ecker, U. K., "Removal of information from working memory : A specific updating process", Journal of Memory and Language, 74, pp.77~90 (2014)
  10. Ecker, U. K., "Binding of intrinsic and extrinsic features in working memory", Journal of Experimental Psychology : General, 142(1), pp.218~234 (2013)
  11. Enticott, P. G., "Associations between laboratory measures of executive inhibitory control and self-reported impulsivity", Personality and Individual Differences, 41(2), pp.285~294 (2006)
  12. Eriksen, B. A, "Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task", Perceptual Psychophysics, 16, pp.143~149 (1974)
  13. Gratton, G., "Optimizing the use of information : Strategic control of activation of responses", Journal of Experimental Psychology : General, 121, pp.480~506 (1992)
  14. Hommel, B., "A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task", Psychological Research, 68, pp.1~17 (2004)
  15. Kane, M. J., "A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity", Journal of Experimental Psychology : General, 130(2), pp.169~183 (2001)
  16. Kane, M. J., "Working-memory capacity and the control of attention : The contributions of goal neglect, response competition, and task set to Stroop interference", Journal of Experimental Psychology : General, 132(1), pp.47~70 (2003)
  17. Kerns, J. G., "Anterior cingulate conflict monitoring and adjustments in control", Science, 303, pp.1023~1026 (2004)
  18. Keye, D., "Individual differences in response conflict adaptations", Frontiers in Psychology, 4, pp.947~ (2013)
  19. Kim, S., "Congruency sequence effect without feature integration and contingency learning", Acta Psychologica, 149, pp.60~68 (2014)
  20. Lieberman, M. D., "Introversion and working memory : Central executive differences", Personality and Individual Differences, 28(3), pp.479~486 (2000)
  21. Logan, G. D., "When it helps to be misled : Facilitative effects of increasing the frequency of conflicting stimuli in a Stroop-like task", Memory and Cognition, 7, pp.166~174 (1979)
  22. Mayr, U., "Conflict adaptation effects in the absence of executive control", Nature Neuroscience, 6, pp.450~452 (2003)
  23. Meier, M. E., "Working memory capacity and Stroop interference: global versus local indices of executive control", Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(3), pp.748~759 (2013)
  24. Redick, T. S., "Measuring working memory capacity with automated complex span tasks", European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28(3), pp.164~171 (2012)
  25. Schmidt, J. R., "Questioning conflict adaptation : proportion congruent and Gratton effects reconsidered", Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(4), pp.615~630 (2013)
  26. Schmidt, J. R., "Now you see it, now you don't : Controlling for contingencies and stimulus repetitions eliminates the Gratton effect", Acta Psychologica, 138(1), pp.176~186 (2011)
  27. Simon, J. R., "Processing auditory information : Interference from an irrelevant cue", Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, pp.433~435 (1969)
  28. Stroop, J. R., "Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions", Journal of Experimental Psychology, 121, pp.15~23 (1935)
  29. Stürmer, B., "Control over location-based response activation in the Simon task : Behavioral and electrophysiological evidence", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 28(6), pp.1345~1363 (2002)
  30. Tomita, H., "Top-down signal from prefrontal cortex in executive control of memory retrieval", Nature, 401(6754), pp.699~ (1999)
  31. Treisman, A., "Features and objects : The fourteenth Bartlett memorial lecture", The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 40(2), pp.201~237 (1988)
  32. Unsworth, N., "An automated version of the operation span task", Behavior Research Methods, 37, pp.498~505 (2005)
  33. Verguts, T., "Adaptation by binding : a learning account of cognitive control", Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(6), pp.252~257 (2009)
  34. Weldon, R. B., "The effect of working memory capacity on conflict monitoring", Acta Psychologica, 142(1), pp.6~14 (2013)
  35. Wendt, M., "Sequential modulations of interference evoked by processing taskirrelevant stimulus features", Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance, 32(3), pp.644~667 (2006)
  36. Wimber, M., "Retrieval induces adaptive forgetting of competing memories via cortical pattern suppression", Nature Neuroscience, 18(4), pp.582~589 (2015)
  37. Zokaei, N., "Attention is required for maintenance of feature binding in visual working memory", The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67(6), pp.1191~1213 (2014)

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (2건)

웹 기반 온라인 자기조절읽기과제를 이용한 단어 예측성 효과의 반복 검증최원일, 이윤형, 백현아, 김병진pp. 87-93한국어 문장 읽기 시의 띄어쓰기의 효과: 복합명사구 연구최원일, 이상민, 김다현pp. 107-119
원문 보기