Literature DB >> 26160426

Declarative strategies persist under increased cognitive load.

Matthew J Crossley1, Erick J Paul2, Jessica L Roeder3, F Gregory Ashby3.   

Abstract

When humans simultaneously execute multiple tasks, performance on individual tasks suffers. Complementing existing theories, this article poses a novel question to investigate interactions between memory systems supporting multi-tasking performance: When a primary and dual task both recruit declarative learning and memory systems, does simultaneous performance of both tasks impair primary task performance because learning in the declarative system is reduced, or because control of the primary task is passed to slower procedural systems? To address this question, participants were trained on either a perceptual categorization task believed to rely on procedural learning or one of three different categorization tasks believed to rely on declarative learning. Task performance was examined with and without a simultaneous dual task thought to recruit working memory and executive attention. To test whether the categories were learned procedurally or declaratively, the response keys were switched after a learning criterion had been reached. Large impairments in performance after switching the response keys are taken to indicate procedural learning, and small impairments are taken to indicate declarative learning. Our results suggest that the declarative memory categorization tasks (regardless of task difficulty) were learned by declarative systems, regardless of whether they were learned under dual-task conditions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive neuroscience of categorization; Cognitive neuroscience of memory; Dual-task performance

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26160426      PMCID: PMC4707129          DOI: 10.3758/s13423-015-0867-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  30 in total

1.  Implicit motor sequence learning is represented in response locations.

Authors:  D B Willingham; L A Wells; J M Farrell; M E Stemwedel
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2000-04

2.  On the fragility of skilled performance: what governs choking under pressure?

Authors:  S L Beilock; T H Carr
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2001-12

3.  The effects of concurrent task interference on category learning: evidence for multiple category learning systems.

Authors:  E M Waldron; F G Ashby
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2001-03

4.  Procedural learning in perceptual categorization.

Authors:  F Gregory Ashby; Shawn W Ell; Elliott M Waldron
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2003-10

5.  Disrupting feedback processing interferes with rule-based but not information-integration category learning.

Authors:  W Todd Maddox; F Gregory Ashby; A David Ing; Alan D Pickering
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-06

Review 6.  Memory systems of the brain: a brief history and current perspective.

Authors:  Larry R Squire
Journal:  Neurobiol Learn Mem       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.877

7.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

8.  On the development of procedural knowledge.

Authors:  D B Willingham; M J Nissen; P Bullemer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 9.  Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory.

Authors:  H Pashler
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1994-09       Impact factor: 17.737

10.  Rules and exemplars in category learning.

Authors:  M A Erickson; J K Kruschke
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1998-06
View more
  2 in total

1.  What is automatized during perceptual categorization?

Authors:  Jessica L Roeder; F Gregory Ashby
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2016-05-24

2.  Increased cognitive load enables unlearning in procedural category learning.

Authors:  Matthew J Crossley; W Todd Maddox; F Gregory Ashby
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 3.051

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.