The Influence of Cognitive Load on Distractor-Response Bindings
Open Access
- 26 July 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Frontiers Media SA in Frontiers in Psychology
Abstract
Binding theories postulate an integration of stimulus and response features into temporary episodic traces or event files. In general, in the visual binding literature, attention is considered to be necessary to feature binding, and a higher cognitive load can lead to worse performance. On the other hand, in stimulus-response binding theories, central attention is not regarded as necessary in binding effects. A possible discrepancy between the visual feature binding findings and the findings in stimulus-response binding studies could lie in the amount of central load implemented, whereas another discrepancy was related to a specific type of process that was manipulated. In the present study, load was manipulated in three levels, such as no load, low load, and high load, and the binding effects were tested under each condition. Load was manipulated by using a secondary task, which was to be carried out simultaneously with the primary task. Additionally, the influence of targeting different working memory processes (maintenance and updating) was examined by varying the time point of the presentation of the secondary task. The results indicate that, under high load, binding effects are observed if memory contents are merely maintained, but not observed when memory contents are actively updated.This publication has 45 references indexed in Scilit:
- Domain-specific control mechanisms for emotional and nonemotional conflict processingCognition, 2013
- Intentional weighting: a basic principle in cognitive controlPsychological Research, 2012
- Visual attention: The past 25 yearsVision Research, 2011
- Distracted and confused?: Selective attention under loadTrends in Cognitive Sciences, 2005
- Caffeine, but not nicotine, enhances visual feature bindingEuropean Journal of Neuroscience, 2005
- Moderate alcohol consumption in humans impairs feature binding in visual perception but not across perception and actionNeuroscience Letters, 2004
- Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus–task bindings in task-shift costsCognitive Psychology, 2003
- Event Files: Evidence for Automatic Integration of Stimulus-Response EpisodesVisual Cognition, 1998
- Features and Objects: The Fourteenth Bartlett Memorial LectureThe Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 1988
- Processing stages in overlapping tasks: Evidence for a central bottleneck.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1984