Matching Items (23)
156674-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Working memory capacity and fluid intelligence are important predictors of performance in educational settings. Thus, understanding the processes underlying the relation between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence is important. Three large scale individual differences experiments were conducted to determine the mechanisms underlying the relation between working memory capacity and

Working memory capacity and fluid intelligence are important predictors of performance in educational settings. Thus, understanding the processes underlying the relation between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence is important. Three large scale individual differences experiments were conducted to determine the mechanisms underlying the relation between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. Experiments 1 and 2 were designed to assess whether individual differences in strategic behavior contribute to the variance shared between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. In Experiment 3, competing theories for describing the underlying processes (cognitive vs. strategy) were evaluated in a comprehensive examination of potential underlying mechanisms. These data help inform existing theories about the mechanisms underlying the relation between WMC and gF. However, these data also indicate that the current theoretical model of the shared variance between WMC and gF would need to be revised to account for the data in Experiment 3. Possible sources of misfit are considered in the discussion along with a consideration of the theoretical implications of observing those relations in the Experiment 3 data.
ContributorsWingert, Kimberly Marie (Author) / Brewer, Gene A. (Thesis advisor) / McNamara, Danielle (Thesis advisor) / McClure, Samuel (Committee member) / Redick, Thomas (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
165097-Thumbnail Image.png
Description

The present study researched the systematic biases in working memory and how items interact with each other in working memory. The first goal of the study was to assess whether working memory representations of one another or systematically interact. This was tested by the repulsion bias in the representations. The

The present study researched the systematic biases in working memory and how items interact with each other in working memory. The first goal of the study was to assess whether working memory representations of one another or systematically interact. This was tested by the repulsion bias in the representations. The second goal was to test whether the interaction is modulated by attentional priority. Attended items exhibited a weaker repulsion bias indicating that attention helped to protect the representation from the impact of the un-attended item.The average mean error for the unattended item was 3.68º while for the attended item it was 2.19º. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that items in working memory systematically interact with each other and further suggests that the main theories in working memory that do not assume interactions need to be updated.

ContributorsNierva, Chadwick (Author) / Bae, Gi-Yeul (Thesis director) / Brewer, Gene (Committee member) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor) / School of Molecular Sciences (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor)
Created2022-05
157877-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
A literature search revealed that previous research on the Attentional Blink (AB) has not examined the role of salience in AB results. I examined how salience affects the AB through multiple forms and degrees of salience in target 1 (T1) and target 2 (T2) stimuli. When examining increased size as

A literature search revealed that previous research on the Attentional Blink (AB) has not examined the role of salience in AB results. I examined how salience affects the AB through multiple forms and degrees of salience in target 1 (T1) and target 2 (T2) stimuli. When examining increased size as a form of salience, results showed a more salient T2 increased recall, attenuating the AB. A more salient T1 did not differ from the control, suggesting the salience (increased size) of T2 is an important factor in the AB, while salience (increased size) of T1 does not affect the AB. Additionally, the differences in target size (50% or 100% larger) were not significantly different, showing size differences at these intervals do not affect AB results. To further explore the lack of difference in results when T1 is larger in size, I examined dynamic stimuli used as T1. T1 stimuli were presented as looming or receding. When T1 was presented as looming or receding, the AB was attenuated (T2 recall at lag 2 was significantly greater). Additionally, T2 recall was significantly worse at lags three and four (showing a larger decrease directly following the attenuated AB). When comparing looming and receding against each other, at lag 2 (when recall accuracy at its lowest) looming increased recall significantly more than receding stimuli. This is expected to be due to the immediate attentional needs related to looming stimuli. Overall, the results showed T2 salience in the form of size significantly increases recall accuracy while T1 size salience does not affect the AB results. With that, dynamic T1 stimuli increase recall accuracy at early lags (lag 2) while it decreases recall accuracy at later lags (lags 3 and 4). This result is found when the stimuli are presented at a larger size (stimuli appearing closer), suggesting the more eminent need for attention results in greater effects on the AB.
ContributorsLafko, Stacie (Author) / Becker, Vaughn (Thesis advisor) / Branaghan, Russell (Committee member) / Gray, Robert (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2019