Browsing by Subject "Working memory capacity"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- Results Per Page
- Sort Options
Item Open Access Working memory capacity: concurrent subtasks need not interfere(2022-10) Şengil, Gülsüm ÖzgeAny extended task episode is subsumed by goal-directed programs that hierar- chically control its execution. We investigated the relationship between working memory capacity and the control instantiated by such hierarchical task entities across four experiments. In a new extended task consisting of subtask A and subtask B, participants first memorized the orientation of subtask A lines (let’s call this event mA), then memorized subtask B lines (mB), then recalled these B lines (rB), and finally recalled A lines (rA). The task structure was: mA-mB-rB- rA. Subtask A lines were thus held in mind during the execution of subtask B. Even though participants had to remember the orientation of lines in both cases, increased WM load of lines A only affected performance on subtask A and did not affect the performance on subtask B. In Experiment 2, four trials of Exp1 were organized into a complex 4-part task with the added condition that A lines of a part be recalled not in that part but in the next part. The task structure was: mA1-mB1-rB1—mA2-mB2-rB2-rA1—mA3-mB3-rB3-rA2—mB3-rB3-rA3. Load of A lines again did not affect B lines. Crucially, load of A2 and A3 lines did not affect the recall of A1 and A2 lines, respectively. In Experiment 3, in a design similar to Exp1, time constraint on mA and mB increased the interference across concurrent subtasks. Experiment 4 showed that increasing the similarity between subtask A and subtask B of Exp1 may increase the across-subtask in terference. We show that WM information of different concurrent subtasks can be maintained separately, perhaps as part of their goal-directed programs. And, encoding to these non-interfering stores, as well as retrieval from them, might depend on attentional and time-based mechanisms.Item Open Access Working memory related to different subtasks can be maintained in separate, non-interfering stores(2024-07) Rezaei, AidaHow can WM maintain more information when its capacity is only around 4 items? Here, we explore the possibility that information related to separate subtasks do not count towards this limit, perhaps, because they are maintained in non-interfering stores. Across the two experiments, we investigated if increasing the WM load related to one subtask interfered with the execution of a concurrent but distinct second subtask. In Experiment 1, participants first saw pictures that were to be kept in mind and used for a later subtask B. They then executed subtask A, while keeping in mind these subtask B pictures. Although subtasks A and B involved maintaining and updating identical sets of pictures, increasing the number of subtask B pictures did not interfere with subtask A execution, which was only affected when the number of pictures relevant to it was increased, suggesting that subtask A and B pictures were maintained in separate non-interfering stores. An objection might be that in Experiment 1, subtask B pictures were passively and not goal-directedly maintained. In Experiment 2, participants executed a more complex subtask that forced participants to maintain and update two separate sets of subtask B pictures while executing subtask A and subtask A also involved WM maintenance and updating of identical pictures. We found that even here increased load of subtask B pictures did not affect subtask A performance. Thus, at least in some multitasking situations, information related to distinct subtasks can be maintained in separate non-interfering stores.