Variation in Working Memory Capacity as Variation in Executive Attention and Control

By M. Kane, Andrew R. A. Conway, David Z. Hambrick, R. Engle. 2012

474 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9c850748d1aea7548c2c8f9820012de6eac17cf9

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

Measuring Working Memory Capacity With Automated Complex Span Tasks (2012, methodology): “…task is small (Jaeggi, Studer-Leuthi et al., 2010; Unsworth, 2010b; Unsworth, Miller et al., 2009), although this is consistent with previous research (Jaeggi, Buschkuehl, Perrig, & Meier, 2010; Kane et al., 2007) showing little overlap between performance on traditional CSTs and n-back tasks.”
The Relationship Between Working Memory Capacity and Executive Functioning: Evidence for a Common Executive Attention Construct (2010, methodology): “…retrieval process, whereas WMC was unrelated to familiarity, which is a retrieval process that does not require controlled attention (see also Delaney & Sahakyan, 2007; Kane & Engle, 2000; McCabe & Smith, 2002; McCabe et al., 2007; Rosen & Engle, 1998; Watson, Bunting, Poole, & Conway, 2005).”
Lapses in sustained attention and their relation to executive control and fluid abilities: An individual differences investigation (2010, background): “Furthermore, this ability may be important for real world phenomena such as mind wandering (e.g., Kane et al., 2007; Kane, Conway, Hambrick & Engle, 2007b).”
Does working memory training generalize (2010, methodology): “Fundamental to this relationship is the well-established association between WMC and controlled attention (Kane et al., 2007b).”
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.”
Variation in Cognitive Failures: An Individual Differences Investigation of Everyday Attention and Memory Failures. (2012, background): “Given the strong theoretical link between individual differences in cognitive control and everyday attention and memory failures, the results from Kane et al. (2007) are exactly what one would expect to see.”
Interference control, working memory capacity, and cognitive abilities: A latent variable analysis (2010, background): “…or suppression as the key mechanism (Hasher et al., 2007), while others argue for the role of active goal maintenance (Braver et al., 2007; Kane et al., 2007), or for the use of accurate retrieval cues and source monitoring processes to focus the search process (Hedden & Park, 2003;…”