Executive Attention, Working Memory Capacity, and a Two-Factor Theory of Cognitive Control.

By R. Engle, M. Kane. 2003

1,183 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/66cb4e29fc3dd377c0f601b09709871e2db6aa0b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain. (2006, positive): “Indeed, it seems reasonable to assume that if the brain can represent it, the brain can also demonstrate working memory for it (see also, for example, Engle & Kane, 2004; Schneider & Detweiler, 1987).”
For Whom the Mind Wanders, and When (2007, methodology): “…mind-wandering rates overall, given its generality, an executive-attention theory of WMC most strongly predicts that lower-WMC subjects should mind-wander more than higher- WMC subjects in life situations requiring substantial cognitive control and focused concentration (Engle & Kane, 2004).”
Interference control, working memory capacity, and cognitive abilities: A latent variable analysis (2010, background): “…recentworkby Salthouse, Pink, andTucker-Drob (2008; see also Tucker-Drob & Salthouse, 2009) suggesting that WMC, gF, Mem, and INT likely reflect the same dimension of cognitive abilities in that all require broad cognitive control abilities (see also Engle & Kane, 2004; Unsworth & Engle, 2007).”
Individual differences in the effects of retrieval from long-term memory (2012, background): “…performance on working memory capacity (WMC) tasks is related to various higher-order cognitive abilities related to success in school environments including reading comprehension, standardized-achievement test scores, reasoning ability, and intelligence (see Engle and Kane (2004) for a review).”
Does Mind Wandering Reflect Executive Function or Executive Failure? Comment on and (2010, background): “…and in their association with different brain areas, in particular , the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (PFC) and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), respectively (e.g., Botvinick, Braver, Barch, Carter, & Cohen, 2001; Braver, Gray, & Burgess, 2007; J. W. Brown & Braver, 2005; Engle & Kane, 2004).”
Working memory capacity: Attention control, secondary memory, or both? A direct test of the dual-component model (2010, background): “In terms of attention control abilities, the current results are consistent with prior work suggesting that domain-general attention control abilities are an important component of WMC (e.g., Engle & Kane, 2004; Unsworth & Engle, 2007a).”
Process Overlap Theory: A Unified Account of the General Factor of Intelligence (2016, background): “The answer probably is that WMC reflects individual differences in the executive component of working memory, particularly executive attention and cognitive control (Engle & Kane, 2004; Engle et al., 1999; Kane, Bleckley, Conway, & Engle, 2001; Kane & Engle, 2002).”
The Relationship Between Working Memory Capacity and Executive Functioning: Evidence for a Common Executive Attention Construct (2010, methodology): “The concept of working memory has become central to many theories of the control of thought and action in cognitive psychology (Cowan et al., 2005; Engle & Kane, 2004; Hasher, Lustig, & Zacks, 2007; Oberauer, 2005).”
Storage capacity explains fluid intelligence but executive control does not (2012, background): “The attention control (also named executive attention) theory proposed by Engle, Kane, and their collaborators (e.g., Engle & Kane, 2004; Kane et al., 2007) suggests that individual performance in both WM tasks and Gf tests depends on the quality of domain-general control over attention.”
Math Performance and Academic Anxiety Forms, from Sociodemographic to Cognitive Aspects: a Meta-analysis on 906,311 Participants (2021, background): “…WM capacity, with a distinction between tasks requiring a lower level of cognitive control (i.e. short-term memory (STM) or simple span tasks), which can be distinguished from tasks requiring higher levels of cognitive control (i.e. WM or complex span tasks) (Cowan, 2016; Engle & Kane, 2004).”