Abstract
Individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) have been implicated in a variety of top-down, attention-control tasks: Higher WMC subjects better ignore irrelevant distractions and withhold habitual responses than do lower WMC subjects. Kane, Poole, Tuholski, and Engle (2006) recently attempted to extend these findings to visual search, but found no relation between WMC and search efficiency, even in difficult tasks yielding steep search slopes. Here we used a visual search task that isolated the contributions of top-down versus bottom-up mechanisms, and induced a habitual response via expectation. Searches that relied primarily on bottom-up mechanisms did not vary with WMC, but searches that relied primarily on top-down mechanisms showed an advantage for higher over lower WMC subjects.
Article PDF
References
Allen, R. J., Baddeley, A. D., &Hitch, G. J. (2006). Is the binding of visual features in working memory resource-demanding?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,135, 298–313.
Bacon, W. F., &Egeth, H. E. (1997). Goal-directed guidance of attention: Evidence from conjunctive visual search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,23, 948–961.
Baddeley, A. D., &Hitch, T. (1974). Working memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89). New York: Academic Press.
Cave, K. R., Kim, M.-S., Bichot, N. P., &Sobel, K. V. (2005). The FeatureGate model of visual selection. In L. Itti, G. Rees, & J. Tsotsos (Eds.),Neurobiology of attention (pp. 547–552). New York: Elsevier.
Connor, C. E., Egeth, H. E., &Yantis, S. (2004). Visual attention: Bottom-up versus top-down.Current Biology,14, R850-R852.
Conway, A., Cowan, N., &Bunting, M. (2001). The cocktail party phenomenon revisited: The importance of WM capacity.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8, 331–335.
Egeth, H. E., Virzi, R. A., &Garbart, H. (1984). Search for conjunctively defined targets.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 32–39.
Friedman-Hill, S., &Wolfe, J. M. (1995). Second-order parallel processing: Visual search for the odd item in a subset.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 531–551.
Han, S.-H., &Kim, M.-S. (2004). Visual search does not remain efficient when executive working memory is working.Psychological Science,15, 623–628.
Kane, M. J., Bleckley, M., Conway, A., &Engle, R. (2001). A controlled-attention view of WM capacity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,128, 309–331.
Kane, M. J., &Engle, R. (2003). 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, 47–70.
Kane, M. J., Poole, B. J., Tuholski, S. W., &Engle, R. W. (2006). Working memory capacity and the top-down control of visual search: Exploring the boundaries of “cutive attention.”Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,32, 749–777.
Kaptein, N. A., Theeuwes, J., &van der Heijden, A. H. C. (1995). Search for a conjunctively defined target can be selectively limited to a color-defined subset of elements.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,21, 1053–1069.
Kiefer, M., Ahlegian, M., &Spitzer, M. (2005). Working memory capacity, indirect semantic priming, and Stroop interference: Pattern of interindividual prefrontal performance differences in healthy volunteers.Neuropsychology,19, 332–344.
Long, D. L., &Prat, C. S. (2002). Working memory and Stroop interference: An individual differences investigation.Memory & Cognition,3, 294–301.
Poisson, M. E., &Wilkinson, F. (1992). Distractor ratio and grouping processes in visual conjunction search.Perception,21, 21–38.
Shen, J., Reingold, E. M., &Pomplun, M. (2000). Distractor ratio and grouping processes in visual conjunction search.Perception,21, 21–38.
Sobel, K. V., &Cave, K. R. (2002). Roles of strategy and salience in conjunction search.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,28, 1055–1070.
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., &Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task.Behavior Research Methods,37, 498–505.
Unsworth, N., Schrock, J. C., &Engle, R. W. (2004). Working memory capacity and the antisaccade task: Individual differences in voluntary saccade control.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 1302–1321.
Wolfe, J. M. (1994). Guided Search 2.0: A revised model of visual search.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,1, 202–238.
Woodman, G. F., &Luck, S. J. (2004). Visual search is slowed when visuospatial working memory is occupied.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 269–274.
Zohary, E., &Hochstein, S. (1989). How serial is serial processing in vision?Perception,18, 191–200.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sobel, K.V., Gerrie, M.P., Poole, B.J. et al. Individual differences in working memory capacity and visual search: The roles of top-down and bottom-up processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 14, 840–845 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194109
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194109