scholarly journals Inattention, Working Memory, and Goal Neglect in a Community Sample

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca N. Elisa ◽  
Emili Balaguer-Ballester ◽  
Benjamin A. Parris
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Goal Neglect

scholarly journals Poor Sleep Quality and Compromised Visual Working Memory Capacity

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 583-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Weizhen Xie ◽  
Anne Berry ◽  
Cindy Lustig ◽  
Patricia Deldin ◽  
Weiwei Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Sleep Quality ◽  
Depressed Mood ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Information Storage ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Poor Sleep ◽  
Poor Sleep Quality ◽  
Related Factors

AbstractObjectives:Reduction in the amount of information (storage capacity) retained in working memory (WM) has been associated with sleep loss. The present study examined whether reduced WM capacity is also related to poor everyday sleep quality and, more importantly, whether the effects of sleep quality could be dissociated from the effects of depressed mood and age on WM.Methods:In two studies, WM was assessed using a short-term recall task, producing behavioral measures for both the amount of retained WM information (capacity) and how precise the retained WM representations were (precision). Self-report measures of sleep quality and depressed mood were obtained using questionnaires.Results:In a sample of college students, Study 1 found that poor sleep quality and depressed mood could independently predict reduced WM capacity, but not WM precision. Study 2 generalized these sleep- and mood-related WM capacity effects to a community sample (aged 21–77 years) and further showed that age was associated with reduced WM precision.Conclusions:Together, these findings demonstrate dissociable effects of three health-related factors (sleep, mood, and age) on WM representations and highlighte the importance of assessing different aspects of WM representations (e.g., capacity and precision) in future neuropsychological research.

scholarly journals Inattention and task switching performance: the role of predictability, working memory load and goal neglect

2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (8) ◽  
pp. 2090-2110
Author(s):  
Gizem Arabacı ◽  
Benjamin A. Parris
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Switching Performance ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Goal Neglect

Abstract Inattention is a symptom of many clinical disorders including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is thought to be primarily related to limitations in working memory. In two studies, we investigated the implications of inattention for task switching performance. In study one, we measured task switching performance using predictable and unpredictable conditions in adults who self-rated inattention and other ADHD-related tendencies. Tasks required proactive control and reactive control, respectively, under both high and low working memory loads. Results revealed that inattentive, but not hyperactive/impulsive traits, predicted switch costs when switching was predictable and working memory load was high. None of the ADHD traits were related to unpredictable switch costs. Study two was designed to: (1) de-confound the role of proactive control and the need to keep track of task order in the predictable task switching paradigm; (2) investigate whether goal neglect, an impairment related to working memory, could explain the relationship between inattention and predictable task switching. Results revealed that neither predictability nor the need to keep track of the task order led to the association between switch costs and inattention, but instead it was the tendency for those high in inattention to neglect preparatory proactive control, especially when reactive control options were available.

scholarly journals Goal Neglect and Working Memory Capacity in 4- to 6-Year-Old Children

2010 ◽  
Vol 81 (6) ◽  
pp. 1687-1695 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Marcovitch ◽  
Janet J. Boseovski ◽  
Robin J. Knapp ◽  
Michael J. Kane
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Working Memory Capacity ◽  
Memory Capacity ◽  
Goal Neglect

scholarly journals No Evidence that Smartphone Notifications Lead to Goal-Neglect

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niklas Johannes ◽  
Harm Veling ◽  
Moniek Buijzen
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Young People ◽  
Stroop Task ◽  
Goal Neglect ◽  
Modified Stroop ◽  
Current Task ◽  
Tentative Evidence ◽  
Task Goals

These days, young people report to be in a state of permanent alertness due to their smartphones. This state has been defined as smartphone vigilance, an awareness that one can always get connected to others in combination with a permanent readiness to respond to incoming smartphone notifications. We argue that receiving a notification makes users vigilant and activates goals (e.g., checking the message) that interfere with other goals needed to perform a task. We thus hypothesized that smartphone vigilance impairs maintenance of current task-goals in working memory, resulting in increased goal-neglect. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a preregistered experiment that examined the effect of smartphone vigilance (incoming notifications) on goal-neglect in a modified Stroop task. We found evidence that participants perceived notifications as distracting, but vigilance did not lead to increased goal-neglect. To the contrary, there was tentative evidence that vigilant participants performed better at the task.

scholarly journals Adolescent-specific memory effects: Evidence from working memory, immediate and 24-hour recognition memory performance in 8- to 30-year-olds

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lena J Skalaban ◽  
Alexandra O. Cohen ◽  
May I. Conley ◽  
Qi Lin ◽  
Garrett N. Schwartz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Recognition Memory ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Delay Condition ◽  
Long Term Memory ◽  
Term Memory ◽  
Recognition Memory Performance ◽  
Similar Accuracy

Working memory and long-term memory develop from childhood to adulthood, but the relationship between them is not fully understood, especially during adolescence. We investigated associations between n-back task performance and subsequent recognition memory in a community sample (8-30 years, n=150) using tasks from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study (ABCD Study®). We added a 24-hour delay condition to assess long-term memory and assessed ages that overlap with those to be assessed in the 10-year ABCD study. Overall working memory, immediate, and long-term recognition memory performance peaked during adolescence. Age effects in recognition memory varied by items (i.e., old targets and distractors and new items) and delay. For immediate recognition, accuracy was higher for new items and targets than distractors, with the highest accuracy for new items emerging by the mid-teens. For long-term recognition, adolescents were more accurate in identifying new items than children and adults and adolescents showed more long-term forgetting of distractors relative to targets. In contrast, adults showed similar accuracy for targets and distractors, while children showed long-term forgetting of both. The results suggest that working memory processes may facilitate long-term storage of task-relevant items over irrelevant items and may benefit the detection of novel information during adolescence.

A-33 Visuospatial Working Memory Performance and Adult ADHD Symptom Severity

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 892-892
Author(s):  
A LeRoy ◽  
C Young ◽  
H Cooke ◽  
C Jacova Chenoweth
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Adult Adhd ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Neuropsychological Testing ◽  
Memory Task ◽  
Adhd Symptoms ◽  
Visuospatial Working Memory ◽  
Adhd Subtype

Abstract Objective Working memory performance among adults with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) demonstrates variable results across literature. This investigation evaluated performance on a visuospatial working memory task relative to scores on measures of ADHD subtype and severity. Method A community sample aged 18 to 77 (n = 31; n men = 15) completed neuropsychological testing and measures of ADHD. The sample was predominantly White (64%; n = 20) and highly educated (Myears = 15.6). Participants were eligible if they were 18 or older, regardless of ADHD symptoms/diagnosis, and excluded if they had neuromedical/neuropsychiatric disorders. Spatial Addition (SA) from the Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-IV) assessed working memory; the Adult ADHD Clinical Diagnostic Scale (ACDS) and Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) assessed ADHD subtype and burden. Results AISRS scores did not explain any variance in SA scores, R2 = 00, p = .970 (β = -.020, p = .970). A one-way between subjects ANOVA demonstrated no significant differences on SA scores between groupings based on ACDS: ADHD (n = 9, M = 13, SD = 4.12), and non-ADHD (n = 20, M = 13.95, SD = 5.27), (F(3,25) = .592, p = .626); ADHD (Inattentive (n = 2, M = 14.4, SD = .707); Hyperactive (n = 1, M = 18.00); Combined (n = 6, M = 11.7, SD = 4.8)). Adjustment for age and education did not change these findings. Conclusions Results failed to indicate any association between visuospatial working memory scores and ADHD symptoms but a larger, diversified sample is necessary to corroborate this null finding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document