Literature DB >> 17910734

Effects of incentive on working memory capacity: behavioral and pupillometric data.

Richard P Heitz1, Josef C Schrock, Tabitha W Payne, Randall W Engle.   

Abstract

We evaluated the hypothesis that individual differences in working memory capacity are explained by variation in mental effort, persons with low capacity exerting less effort than persons with high capacity. Groups previously rated high and low in working memory capacity performed the reading span task under three levels of incentive. The effort hypothesis holds that low span subjects exert less effort during task performance than do high spans. Subjects' pupil sizes were recorded online during task performance as a measure of mental effort. Both recall performance and pupil diameter were found to be increased under incentives, but were additive with span (incentives increased performance and pupil diameter equivalently for both span groups). Contrary to the effort hypothesis, task-evoked pupillary responses indicated that if anything, low span subjects exert more effort than do high spans.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17910734     DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00605.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychophysiology        ISSN: 0048-5772            Impact factor:   4.016


  41 in total

1.  Putting effort into infant cognition.

Authors:  Zsuzsa Kaldy; Erik Blaser
Journal:  Curr Dir Psychol Sci       Date:  2020-02-27

Review 2.  CNTRICS final task selection: working memory.

Authors:  Deanna M Barch; Marc G Berman; Randy Engle; Jessica Hurdelbrink Jones; John Jonides; Angus Macdonald; Derek Evan Nee; Thomas S Redick; Scott R Sponheim
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 9.306

3.  Individual differences in the allocation of attention to items in working memory: Evidence from pupillometry.

Authors:  Nash Unsworth; Matthew K Robison
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-06

4.  Individual differences in baseline oculometrics: Examining variation in baseline pupil diameter, spontaneous eye blink rate, and fixation stability.

Authors:  Nash Unsworth; Matthew K Robison; Ashley L Miller
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 3.282

5.  Pupillary responses during a joint attention task are associated with nonverbal cognitive abilities and sub-clinical symptoms of autism.

Authors:  Valentyna Erstenyuk; Meghan R Swanson; Michael Siller
Journal:  Res Autism Spectr Disord       Date:  2014-06-01

6.  Task-evoked pupillary responses track effort exertion: Evidence from task-switching.

Authors:  Kevin da Silva Castanheira; Sophia LoParco; A Ross Otto
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2020-10-20       Impact factor: 3.282

7.  Encoding dynamics in free recall: Examining attention allocation with pupillometry.

Authors:  Nash Unsworth; Ashley L Miller
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-01

8.  Is working memory capacity related to baseline pupil diameter?

Authors:  Nash Unsworth; Ashley L Miller; Matthew K Robison
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2020-10-01

9.  Distinguishing cognitive effort and working memory load using scale-invariance and alpha suppression in EEG.

Authors:  Omid Kardan; Kirsten C S Adam; Irida Mance; Nathan W Churchill; Edward K Vogel; Marc G Berman
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2020-02-14       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Reward elicits cognitive control over emotional distraction: Evidence from pupillometry.

Authors:  Amy T Walsh; David Carmel; Gina M Grimshaw
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 3.282

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.