Cargando…

Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks

Working memory (WM) is a system for maintenance of and access to a limited number of goal-relevant representations in the service of higher cognition. Because of its limited capacity, WM requires interference-control processes, allowing us to avoid being distracted by irrelevant information. Recent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rey-Mermet, Alodie, Singh, Krishneil A., Gignac, Gilles E., Brydges, Christopher R., Ecker, Ullrich K. H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7710115/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33264336
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243053
_version_ 1783617883098578944
author Rey-Mermet, Alodie
Singh, Krishneil A.
Gignac, Gilles E.
Brydges, Christopher R.
Ecker, Ullrich K. H.
author_facet Rey-Mermet, Alodie
Singh, Krishneil A.
Gignac, Gilles E.
Brydges, Christopher R.
Ecker, Ullrich K. H.
author_sort Rey-Mermet, Alodie
collection PubMed
description Working memory (WM) is a system for maintenance of and access to a limited number of goal-relevant representations in the service of higher cognition. Because of its limited capacity, WM requires interference-control processes, allowing us to avoid being distracted by irrelevant information. Recent research has proposed two interference-control processes, which are conceptually similar: (1) an active, item-wise removal process assumed to remove no-longer relevant information from WM, and (2) an inhibitory process assumed to suppress the activation of distractors against competing, goal-relevant representations. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the tasks used to assess removal and inhibition measure the same interference-control construct. Results showed acceptable to good reliabilities for nearly all measures. Similar to previous studies, a structural equation modeling approach identified a reliable latent variable of removal. However, also similar to some previous studies, no latent variable of inhibition could be established. This was the case even when the correlation matrix used to compute the latent variable of inhibition was disattenuated for imperfect reliability. Critically, the individual measures of inhibition were unrelated to the latent variable of removal. These results provide tentative support for the notion that removal is not related to the interference-control processes assessed in inhibition tasks. This suggests that the removal process should be conceptualized as a process independent of the concept of inhibition, as proposed in computational WM models that implement removal as the “unbinding” of a WM item from the context in which it occurred.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7710115
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77101152020-12-03 Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks Rey-Mermet, Alodie Singh, Krishneil A. Gignac, Gilles E. Brydges, Christopher R. Ecker, Ullrich K. H. PLoS One Research Article Working memory (WM) is a system for maintenance of and access to a limited number of goal-relevant representations in the service of higher cognition. Because of its limited capacity, WM requires interference-control processes, allowing us to avoid being distracted by irrelevant information. Recent research has proposed two interference-control processes, which are conceptually similar: (1) an active, item-wise removal process assumed to remove no-longer relevant information from WM, and (2) an inhibitory process assumed to suppress the activation of distractors against competing, goal-relevant representations. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which the tasks used to assess removal and inhibition measure the same interference-control construct. Results showed acceptable to good reliabilities for nearly all measures. Similar to previous studies, a structural equation modeling approach identified a reliable latent variable of removal. However, also similar to some previous studies, no latent variable of inhibition could be established. This was the case even when the correlation matrix used to compute the latent variable of inhibition was disattenuated for imperfect reliability. Critically, the individual measures of inhibition were unrelated to the latent variable of removal. These results provide tentative support for the notion that removal is not related to the interference-control processes assessed in inhibition tasks. This suggests that the removal process should be conceptualized as a process independent of the concept of inhibition, as proposed in computational WM models that implement removal as the “unbinding” of a WM item from the context in which it occurred. Public Library of Science 2020-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7710115/ /pubmed/33264336 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243053 Text en © 2020 Rey-Mermet 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Rey-Mermet, Alodie
Singh, Krishneil A.
Gignac, Gilles E.
Brydges, Christopher R.
Ecker, Ullrich K. H.
Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
title Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
title_full Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
title_fullStr Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
title_full_unstemmed Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
title_short Interference control in working memory: Evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
title_sort interference control in working memory: evidence for discriminant validity between removal and inhibition tasks
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7710115/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33264336
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243053
work_keys_str_mv AT reymermetalodie interferencecontrolinworkingmemoryevidencefordiscriminantvaliditybetweenremovalandinhibitiontasks
AT singhkrishneila interferencecontrolinworkingmemoryevidencefordiscriminantvaliditybetweenremovalandinhibitiontasks
AT gignacgillese interferencecontrolinworkingmemoryevidencefordiscriminantvaliditybetweenremovalandinhibitiontasks
AT brydgeschristopherr interferencecontrolinworkingmemoryevidencefordiscriminantvaliditybetweenremovalandinhibitiontasks
AT eckerullrichkh interferencecontrolinworkingmemoryevidencefordiscriminantvaliditybetweenremovalandinhibitiontasks