Cargando…

What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory

BACKGROUND: Not only is compulsive checking the most common symptom in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) with an estimated prevalence of 50–80% in patients, but approximately ∼15% of the general population reveal subclinical checking tendencies that impact negatively on their performance in daily...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Harkin, Ben, Miellet, Sebastien, Kessler, Klaus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3458048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23049755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044689
_version_ 1782244615675445248
author Harkin, Ben
Miellet, Sebastien
Kessler, Klaus
author_facet Harkin, Ben
Miellet, Sebastien
Kessler, Klaus
author_sort Harkin, Ben
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Not only is compulsive checking the most common symptom in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) with an estimated prevalence of 50–80% in patients, but approximately ∼15% of the general population reveal subclinical checking tendencies that impact negatively on their performance in daily activities. Therefore, it is critical to understand how checking affects attention and memory in clinical as well as subclinical checkers. Eye fixations are commonly used as indicators for the distribution of attention but research in OCD has revealed mixed results at best. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDING: Here we report atypical eye movement patterns in subclinical checkers during an ecologically valid working memory (WM) manipulation. Our key manipulation was to present an intermediate probe during the delay period of the memory task, explicitly asking for the location of a letter, which, however, had not been part of the encoding set (i.e., misleading participants). Using eye movement measures we now provide evidence that high checkers’ inhibitory impairments for misleading information results in them checking the contents of WM in an atypical manner. Checkers fixate more often and for longer when misleading information is presented than non-checkers. Specifically, checkers spend more time checking stimulus locations as well as locations that had actually been empty during encoding. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We conclude that these atypical eye movement patterns directly reflect internal checking of memory contents and we discuss the implications of our findings for the interpretation of behavioural and neuropsychological data. In addition our results highlight the importance of ecologically valid methodology for revealing the impact of detrimental attention and memory checking on eye movement patterns.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3458048
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34580482012-10-03 What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory Harkin, Ben Miellet, Sebastien Kessler, Klaus PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Not only is compulsive checking the most common symptom in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) with an estimated prevalence of 50–80% in patients, but approximately ∼15% of the general population reveal subclinical checking tendencies that impact negatively on their performance in daily activities. Therefore, it is critical to understand how checking affects attention and memory in clinical as well as subclinical checkers. Eye fixations are commonly used as indicators for the distribution of attention but research in OCD has revealed mixed results at best. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDING: Here we report atypical eye movement patterns in subclinical checkers during an ecologically valid working memory (WM) manipulation. Our key manipulation was to present an intermediate probe during the delay period of the memory task, explicitly asking for the location of a letter, which, however, had not been part of the encoding set (i.e., misleading participants). Using eye movement measures we now provide evidence that high checkers’ inhibitory impairments for misleading information results in them checking the contents of WM in an atypical manner. Checkers fixate more often and for longer when misleading information is presented than non-checkers. Specifically, checkers spend more time checking stimulus locations as well as locations that had actually been empty during encoding. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: We conclude that these atypical eye movement patterns directly reflect internal checking of memory contents and we discuss the implications of our findings for the interpretation of behavioural and neuropsychological data. In addition our results highlight the importance of ecologically valid methodology for revealing the impact of detrimental attention and memory checking on eye movement patterns. Public Library of Science 2012-09-25 /pmc/articles/PMC3458048/ /pubmed/23049755 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044689 Text en © 2012 Harkin et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Harkin, Ben
Miellet, Sebastien
Kessler, Klaus
What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory
title What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory
title_full What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory
title_fullStr What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory
title_full_unstemmed What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory
title_short What Checkers Actually Check: An Eye Tracking Study of Inhibitory Control and Working Memory
title_sort what checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3458048/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23049755
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0044689
work_keys_str_mv AT harkinben whatcheckersactuallycheckaneyetrackingstudyofinhibitorycontrolandworkingmemory
AT mielletsebastien whatcheckersactuallycheckaneyetrackingstudyofinhibitorycontrolandworkingmemory
AT kesslerklaus whatcheckersactuallycheckaneyetrackingstudyofinhibitorycontrolandworkingmemory