Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

High working memory load leads to more Ebbinghaus illusion

By J. W. De Fockert and Si Wu

Abstract

The evidence that distractor processing increases with greater load on working memory has come mainly from Stroop-type interference tasks, making it difficult to establish whether cognitive load affects distractor processing at the perceptual level or during response selection. We measured the Ebbinghaus illusion under varying levels of working memory load to test whether cognitive control is also relevant for preventing processing of distractors that do not produce any response conflict, and instead affect target processing at the perceptual level. The Ebbinghaus illusion was greater under high working memory load, suggesting that availability of cognitive control functions is critical to reduce distractor processing even for distractors that are not associated with a response. We conclude that the effect of loading working memory during selective attention leads to greater distractor perception

Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.gold.ac.uk:2543

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2006). Anterior cingulate activity and level of cognitive conflict: explicit comparisons. doi
  2. (2001). Anterior cingulate cortex, conflict monitoring, and levels of processing. doi
  3. (2008). Attentional capture by salient color singleton distractors is modulated by top-down dimensional set. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance doi
  4. (1992). Attentional Modulation of Size Contrast. doi
  5. (2007). Concurrent working memory load can facilitate selective attention: Evidence for specialized load. doi
  6. (2005). Concurrent working memory load can reduce distraction. doi
  7. (2005). Distracted and confused?: selective attention under load. doi
  8. (2002). E-Prime user’s guide.
  9. (2006). Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: visual working memory content affects visual attention. doi
  10. Going round in circles: shape effects in the Ebbinghaus illusion. doi
  11. (1971). Judgmental model of the Ebbinghaus illusion. doi
  12. (2004). Load theory of selective attention and cognitive control.
  13. (2007). More accurate size contrast judgments in the Ebbinghaus Illusion by a remote culture. doi
  14. (1997). On the efficiency of attentional selection: Efficient visual search results in inefficient rejection of distraction. doi
  15. (1995). Perceptual load as a necessary condition for selective attention. doi
  16. (1993). Size contrast as a function of conceptual similarity between test and inducers. doi
  17. (1974). Size contrast as a function of configural similarity. doi
  18. (2005). The role of working memory in attentional capture. doi
  19. (2001). The role of working memory in visual selective attention. doi
  20. (2006). Visual search for size-defined target objects is modulated by the Ebbinghaus apparent-size illusion: Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of the context objects. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.