Working memory load and its impact on space-based and motion-based stimulus-response correspondence (SRC) effects

ABSTRACT

If spatial stimulus-response correspondence (SRC) effect results from automatic processes, cognitive load should not affect this effect. However, if spatial SRC effect is based on the interference of cognitive codes, cognitive load should influence it. Furthermore, the motion-based SRC effect should be affected by the cognitive load, as this SRC effect is related to the cognitive codes interference. In this study, participants performed combined tasks for space-based and motion-based SRC effects without working memory load (WML), or under spatial and verbal WML to see if cognitive load affects both SRC effects or just one. Results demonstrated that space-based SRC remained intact from WML, while the motion-based SRC was influenced by WML, although only in limited degree. This supports the notion that automatic processes underlie space-based SRC effect, whereas the motion-based SRC effect is related to cognitive codes interference, but the latter requires further investigation.     

Age-related hearing loss associated with altered response efficiency and variability on a visual sustained attention task

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the association between age-related hearing loss (ARHL) and differences in response efficiency and variability on a sustained attention task. The study population comprised 32 participants in a hearing loss group (HLG) and 34 controls without hearing loss (CG). Mean reaction time (RT) and accuracy were recorded to assess response efficiency. RT variability was decomposed to examine temporal aspects of variability associated with neural arousal and top-down executive control of vigilant attention. The HLG had a significantly longer mean RT, possibly reflecting a strategic approach to maintain accuracy. The HLG also demonstrated altered variability (indicative of greater decline in neural arousal) but maintained executive control that was significantly predictive of poorer response efficiency. Adults with ARHL may rely on higher-order attention networks to compensate for decline in both peripheral sensory function and in subcortical arousal systems which mediate lower-order automatic neurocognitive processes.     

Combination or Differentiation? Two theories of processing order in classification

Does cognition begin with an undifferentiated stimulus whole, which can be divided into distinct attributes if time and cognitive resources allow (Differentiation Theory)? Or does it begin with the attributes, which are combined if time and cognitive resources allow (Combination Theory)? Across psychology, use of the terms analytic and non-analytic imply that Differentiation Theory is correct—if cognition begins with the attributes, then synthesis, rather than analysis, is the more appropriate chemical analogy. We re-examined four classic studies of the effects of time pressure, incidental training, and concurrent load on classification and category learning (Kemler Nelson, 1984; Smith & Kemler Nelson, 1984; Smith & Shapiro, 1989; Ward, 1983). These studies are typically interpreted as supporting Differentiation Theory over Combination Theory, while more recent work in classification (Milton et al., 2008, et seq.) supports the opposite conclusion. Across seven experiments, replication and re-analysis of the four classic studies revealed that they do not support Differentiation Theory over Combination Theory—two experiments support Combination Theory over Differentiation Theory, and the remainder are compatible with both accounts. We conclude that Combination Theory provides a parsimonious account of both classic and more recent work in this area. The presented data do not require Differentiation Theory, nor a Combination–Differentiation hybrid account.     

Perceiving versus inferring movements to understand dynamic events: The influence of content complexity

ObjectivesWhat type of visual presentation is best in helping learners to understand the functioning of a dynamic system and under what conditions? This study investigated the effect of content complexity on perceived cognitive load and performance resulting from studying depicted movements of team play either in an explicit manner (animation) or via arrow symbols (static diagram).DesignA 2 (treatment: diagram vs. animation) × 2 (content complexity: low vs. high) between subjects design was adopted in the experiment.MethodsForty-eight university students were randomly assigned to the four study conditions and required to perform a reconstruction test and rate their perceived cognitive load following the study phase.ResultsData analyses revealed that for low-complexity content, participants exposed to the animation treatment learned more efficiently – based on the combination of learning and cognitive load scores – than those exposed to the diagram treatment. On the other hand, for high-complexity content, participants exposed to the diagram treatment learned more efficiently than those exposed to the animation treatment.ConclusionThe findings stress the importance of considering the task complexity factor when designing and presenting instructional materials to learners.     

The Effect of Load Uncertainty on Neuromotor Control in Catching: Gender Differences and Short Foreperiods

Abstract

To reveal how the CNS copes with load uncertainty in catching, electromyography (EMG) was recorded in 15 females and 14 males while catching visually identical balls of known and unknown weights under varied (1–10?s) and constant (1?s) foreperiods (warning time). EMG integrals, which represented total muscle activity, were computed for three time intervals prior to the catch (anticipatory), and one interval after (compensatory). Load uncertainty caused the CNS to utilize an anticipatory strategy in several muscles, primarily during the ball-flight interval, characterized by preparation to catch balls of unknown weight by utilizing an average of 99.7% of the muscle activation used to catch the heaviest ball under the known weight condition. The constant 1?s foreperiod, which permitted precise temporal anticipation of ball release, did not influence the anticipatory strategy adopted by the CNS to cope with load uncertainty. There were no observed differences in the neuromotor control used by men and women to manage load uncertainty in catching, although there was an interesting difference in the way men and women employed the triceps to prepare to catch balls of a known weight.