Literature DB >> 35701660

When global and local information about attentional demands collide: evidence for global dominance.

Jihyun Suh1,2, Merve Ileri-Tayar1, Julie M Bugg3.   

Abstract

This study investigated how global and local information about attentional demands influence attentional control, with a special interest in whether one information source dominates when they conflict. In Experiment 1, we manipulated proportion congruence in two blocks (i.e., mostly congruent versus mostly incongruent) of a Stroop task to create different global demands (i.e., low versus high, respectively). Additionally, we created different local demands by embedding 10-trial lists in each block that varied in their proportion congruence (10% to 90% congruent), and half the lists were preceded by a valid precue explicitly informing participants of upcoming attentional demands. Stroop effects were smaller in mostly incongruent compared with mostly congruent blocks demonstrating the influence of global information. Stroop effects also varied according to the proportion congruence of the abbreviated lists and differed between cued and uncued lists (i.e., cueing effect), demonstrating the influence of local information. Critically, we found that global and local information interacted, such that the cueing effect differed between the two blocks. While there was evidence that participants used the precue to relax control for mostly congruent lists within the mostly congruent block, the cueing effect was absent within the mostly incongruent block. In Experiment 2, we replicated the latter pattern and thereby provided further evidence that participants do not use local precues to relax control when attentional demands are globally high. The findings suggest that both global and local information sources influence the control of attention, and global information dominates local expectations when the information sources collide.
© 2022. The Psychonomic Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attentional demands; Cognitive control; Global information; Local information; Precues

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35701660     DOI: 10.3758/s13414-022-02521-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.157


  33 in total

1.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control.

Authors:  M M Botvinick; T S Braver; D M Barch; C S Carter; J D Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Item-specific adaptation and the conflict-monitoring hypothesis: a computational model.

Authors:  Chris Blais; Serje Robidoux; Evan F Risko; Derek Besner
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Expectations and experience: Dissociable bases for cognitive control?

Authors:  Julie M Bugg; Nathaniel T Diede; Emily R Cohen-Shikora; Diana Selmeczy
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-02-16       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  Beyond trial-by-trial adaptation: A quantification of the time scale of cognitive control.

Authors:  Bart Aben; Tom Verguts; Eva Van den Bussche
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Attention modulation by proportion congruency: the asymmetrical list shifting effect.

Authors:  Elger L Abrahamse; Wout Duthoo; Wim Notebaert; Evan F Risko
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-04-08       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 6.  Grounding cognitive control in associative learning.

Authors:  Elger Abrahamse; Senne Braem; Wim Notebaert; Tom Verguts
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2016-05-05       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  The variable nature of cognitive control: a dual mechanisms framework.

Authors:  Todd S Braver
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2012-01-12       Impact factor: 20.229

8.  Conflict-triggered top-down control: default mode, last resort, or no such thing?

Authors:  Julie M Bugg
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 9.  Measuring Adaptive Control in Conflict Tasks.

Authors:  Senne Braem; Julie M Bugg; James R Schmidt; Matthew J C Crump; Daniel H Weissman; Wim Notebaert; Tobias Egner
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 20.229

10.  In Support of a Distinction between Voluntary and Stimulus-Driven Control: A Review of the Literature on Proportion Congruent Effects.

Authors:  Julie M Bugg; Matthew J C Crump
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2012-09-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.