Cargando…
The Time Course of Updating in Running Span
Running span can be performed by either passively listening to memory items or actively updating the target set. Previous research suggests that the active updating process is demanding and time consuming and is favored at slow rates of presentation while the passive strategy is employed at fast rat...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Psychological Association
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7790168/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31855001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000800 |
_version_ | 1783633370740162560 |
---|---|
author | Kaur, Shraddha Norris, Dennis G. Gathercole, Susan E. |
author_facet | Kaur, Shraddha Norris, Dennis G. Gathercole, Susan E. |
author_sort | Kaur, Shraddha |
collection | PubMed |
description | Running span can be performed by either passively listening to memory items or actively updating the target set. Previous research suggests that the active updating process is demanding and time consuming and is favored at slow rates of presentation while the passive strategy is employed at fast rates. Two experiments examined the time course of recruitment of resources during task performance and its sensitivity to presentation rate. In Experiment 1, participants performed 1 of 3 serial recall tasks: running span, simple span, and modified span. The tasks were completed at the same time as a choice reaction time (RT; CRT) task and the RTs were used to index the resource demands of the memory task. Running span generated higher RT costs than simple span. The costs were present only for positions at and beyond the point in the sequence when the target memory set was changed, indicating a shift to a more cognitively demanding mode of updating. At these positions there was a generalized increase in RT costs that peaked 1,000 ms following item presentation. In Experiment 2 the resource demands of running span varied with presentation rate and a peak demand at 1,000 ms was again evident, but only with a slow presentation rate. In conjunction with strategy reports, these data establish that the process of active updating in running span is slow and cognitively demanding, making it difficult to use when presentation rates are fast. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7790168 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | American Psychological Association |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77901682021-01-14 The Time Course of Updating in Running Span Kaur, Shraddha Norris, Dennis G. Gathercole, Susan E. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn Research Articles Running span can be performed by either passively listening to memory items or actively updating the target set. Previous research suggests that the active updating process is demanding and time consuming and is favored at slow rates of presentation while the passive strategy is employed at fast rates. Two experiments examined the time course of recruitment of resources during task performance and its sensitivity to presentation rate. In Experiment 1, participants performed 1 of 3 serial recall tasks: running span, simple span, and modified span. The tasks were completed at the same time as a choice reaction time (RT; CRT) task and the RTs were used to index the resource demands of the memory task. Running span generated higher RT costs than simple span. The costs were present only for positions at and beyond the point in the sequence when the target memory set was changed, indicating a shift to a more cognitively demanding mode of updating. At these positions there was a generalized increase in RT costs that peaked 1,000 ms following item presentation. In Experiment 2 the resource demands of running span varied with presentation rate and a peak demand at 1,000 ms was again evident, but only with a slow presentation rate. In conjunction with strategy reports, these data establish that the process of active updating in running span is slow and cognitively demanding, making it difficult to use when presentation rates are fast. American Psychological Association 2019-12-19 2020-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7790168/ /pubmed/31855001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000800 Text en © 2019 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s). Author(s) grant(s) the American Psychological Association the exclusive right to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Kaur, Shraddha Norris, Dennis G. Gathercole, Susan E. The Time Course of Updating in Running Span |
title | The Time Course of Updating in Running Span |
title_full | The Time Course of Updating in Running Span |
title_fullStr | The Time Course of Updating in Running Span |
title_full_unstemmed | The Time Course of Updating in Running Span |
title_short | The Time Course of Updating in Running Span |
title_sort | time course of updating in running span |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7790168/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31855001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000800 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kaurshraddha thetimecourseofupdatinginrunningspan AT norrisdennisg thetimecourseofupdatinginrunningspan AT gathercolesusane thetimecourseofupdatinginrunningspan AT kaurshraddha timecourseofupdatinginrunningspan AT norrisdennisg timecourseofupdatinginrunningspan AT gathercolesusane timecourseofupdatinginrunningspan |