How attention and working memory work together in the pursuit of goals: The development of the sampling-remembering trade-off.

Erik Blaser, Zsuzsa Kaldy
Author Information
  1. Erik Blaser: University of Massachusetts Boston, Department of Psychology, Developmental and Brain Sciences Program, 100 Morrissey Blvd., Boston, MA, 02125, USA.
  2. Zsuzsa Kaldy: University of Massachusetts Boston, Department of Psychology, Developmental and Brain Sciences Program, 100 Morrissey Blvd., Boston, MA, 02125, USA.

Abstract

Most work in the last 50 years on visual working memory and attention has used a classic psychophysical setup: participants are instructed to attend to, or remember, a set of items. This setup sidesteps the role of ; effort is maximal, tasks are simple, and strategies are limited. While this approach has yielded important insights, it provides no clear path toward an integrative theory (Kristjánsson & Draschkow, 2021) and, like studying a town's walkability by having its college students run the 50-yard dash, it runs the danger of focusing on edge cases. Here, in this theoretical opinion article, we argue for an approach where dynamic relationships between the agent and the environment are understood functionally, in light of an agent's goals. This means a shift in emphasis from the performance of the mechanisms underlying a narrow task ("remember these items!") to their in pursuit of a naturalistic goal ("make a sandwich!", Land & Hayhoe, 2001). Here, we highlight the between exploiting goal-relevant information in the environment versus maintaining it in working memory. We present a dynamic feedback model of this trade-off - where the individual weighs the subjective of accessing external information versus those of maintaining it in memory - using insights from existing cognitive control models based on economic principles (Kool & Botvinick, 2018). This trade-off is particularly interesting in children, as the optimal use of internal resources is even more crucial when limited. Our model makes some specific predictions for future research: 1) an individual child strikes a preferred balance between the effort to attend to goal-relevant information in the environment versus the effort to maintain it in working memory, 2) in order to maintain this balance as underlying memory and cognitive control mechanisms improve with age, the child will have to increasingly shift toward remembering, and 3) older children will show greater adaptability to changing task demands.

Keywords

References

  1. Trends Cogn Sci. 1999 Feb;3(2):57-65 [PMID: 10234228]
  2. Dev Psychol. 2022 Oct;58(10):1962-1973 [PMID: 35771499]
  3. Annu Rev Psychol. 2011;62:73-101 [PMID: 19575619]
  4. Psychol Sci. 2015 Feb;26(2):182-8 [PMID: 25491269]
  5. Cognition. 2013 Feb;126(2):319-25 [PMID: 23099124]
  6. Dev Sci. 2020 Jan;23(1):e12861 [PMID: 31108017]
  7. Dev Psychol. 2024 Mar;60(3):582-594 [PMID: 38421800]
  8. Trends Cogn Sci. 2019 Aug;23(8):699-714 [PMID: 31257145]
  9. Psychol Rev. 2022 Apr;129(3):564-585 [PMID: 34383523]
  10. Trends Cogn Sci. 1999 Sep;3(9):345-351 [PMID: 10461197]
  11. Cogn Psychol. 2003 May;46(3):260-301 [PMID: 12694695]
  12. Psychol Sci. 2017 Jul;28(7):967-978 [PMID: 28489500]
  13. J Cogn. 2024 Jan 09;7(1):8 [PMID: 38223232]
  14. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2017 Jul 25;40:99-124 [PMID: 28375769]
  15. J Exp Psychol Gen. 1999 Sep;128(3):309-331 [PMID: 10513398]
  16. Vision Res. 1998 Jan;38(1):125-37 [PMID: 9474383]
  17. Vision Res. 2001 May;41(12):1561-74 [PMID: 11343722]
  18. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2020 Apr;29(2):180-185 [PMID: 33746375]
  19. Psychol Sci. 2014 Sep;25(9):1712-21 [PMID: 24973137]
  20. J Vis. 2011 Mar 18;11(3): [PMID: 21421747]
  21. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022 Apr;44:215-219 [PMID: 34717277]
  22. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2021 Sep;74(9):1477-1496 [PMID: 33752519]
  23. Neuron. 2013 Jul 24;79(2):217-40 [PMID: 23889930]
  24. Neuropsychologia. 2011 May;49(6):1407-9 [PMID: 21295047]
  25. Psychol Sci. 2010 Nov;21(11):1643-5 [PMID: 20923928]
  26. Trends Cogn Sci. 2018 Feb;22(2):170-188 [PMID: 29229206]
  27. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2014 Jul;20(6):599-610 [PMID: 24959983]
  28. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2016 Mar;11(2):239-64 [PMID: 26993277]
  29. Neuropsychologia. 2006;44(11):2037-78 [PMID: 16580701]
  30. Front Integr Neurosci. 2022 Jul 13;16:896919 [PMID: 35910339]
  31. Child Dev. 2022 Jan;93(1):25-38 [PMID: 34510416]
  32. Cogn Dev. 2020 Jul-Sep;55: [PMID: 34305310]
  33. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2015 Jun;15(2):395-415 [PMID: 25673005]
  34. Vision Res. 2015 Aug;113(Pt A):71-7 [PMID: 26093155]
  35. Child Dev. 2018 Jul;89(4):1283-1295 [PMID: 28397991]
  36. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Mar;133(1):83-100 [PMID: 14979753]
  37. Trends Cogn Sci. 2022 Dec;26(12):1043-1046 [PMID: 36207261]
  38. Cognition. 2022 Jul;224:105075 [PMID: 35247864]
  39. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2020 Mar;149(3):501-517 [PMID: 31448938]
  40. Annu Rev Psychol. 2013;64:135-68 [PMID: 23020641]
  41. Curr Biol. 2020 Sep 7;30(17):3457-3464.e3 [PMID: 32649910]
  42. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2010 Nov;139(4):665-82 [PMID: 20853993]
  43. Behav Brain Sci. 2020 Mar 11;43:e18 [PMID: 32159498]
  44. Neuropsychologia. 2019 Feb 4;123:152-158 [PMID: 29723599]
  45. Psychol Bull. 1988 Sep;104(2):163-91 [PMID: 3054993]
  46. Neuroimage. 2020 Nov 15;222:117254 [PMID: 32800992]
  47. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2012 Dec;22(6):996-1003 [PMID: 22647641]
  48. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2001 Jun;130(2):169-83 [PMID: 11409097]
  49. Trends Cogn Sci. 2022 Dec;26(12):1029-1030 [PMID: 36272935]
  50. Trends Cogn Sci. 2016 Sep;20(9):676-688 [PMID: 27542527]
  51. Science. 1966 Dec 23;154(3756):1583-5 [PMID: 5924930]
  52. Proc Biol Sci. 2020 Jun 10;287(1928):20192927 [PMID: 32517613]
  53. Curr Biol. 2021 Feb 22;31(4):869-874.e5 [PMID: 33278355]
  54. Cognition. 2023 May;234:105381 [PMID: 36724621]
  55. J Cogn Neurosci. 1992 Summer;4(3):281-8 [PMID: 23964884]
  56. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2021 May;83(4):1375-1390 [PMID: 33791942]
  57. Cognition. 2022 Nov;228:105228 [PMID: 35905543]
  58. Science. 1964 Mar 13;143(3611):1190-2 [PMID: 17833905]
  59. Child Dev. 2017 May;88(3):1015-1032 [PMID: 27759890]
  60. Dev Rev. 2023 Sep;69: [PMID: 37662651]
  61. Behav Brain Sci. 2019 Feb 04;43:e1 [PMID: 30714890]
  62. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2019 Apr;36:100616 [PMID: 30769261]
  63. Child Dev Perspect. 2020 Dec;14(4):202-207 [PMID: 37162814]
  64. Psychon Bull Rev. 2013 Apr;20(2):228-42 [PMID: 23233157]
  65. PLoS One. 2013 Jul 22;8(7):e68210 [PMID: 23894295]
  66. Trends Cogn Sci. 2022 Dec;26(12):1031-1034 [PMID: 36243670]
  67. Psychol Bull. 1982 Mar;91(2):276-92 [PMID: 7071262]
  68. Psychol Sci. 2017 Sep;28(9):1321-1333 [PMID: 28731839]
  69. Cognition. 2005 Sep;97(2):153-77 [PMID: 16226561]
  70. Trends Cogn Sci. 2018 Apr;22(4):337-349 [PMID: 29477776]
  71. Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Dec;2(12):899-908 [PMID: 30988433]
  72. J Exp Child Psychol. 2023 Jan;225:105535 [PMID: 36041236]
  73. Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Jun;25:69-91 [PMID: 27908561]
  74. J Exp Child Psychol. 2015 Apr;132:32-50 [PMID: 25590899]
  75. Front Psychol. 2021 Jan 15;11:607973 [PMID: 33584442]
  76. Cogn Sci. 2016 Jul;40(5):1080-127 [PMID: 26306555]
  77. Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Apr;9(4):188-94 [PMID: 15808501]
  78. Behav Res Methods. 2018 Feb;50(1):94-106 [PMID: 29330763]
  79. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2019 Sep;45(9):1529-1551 [PMID: 30407025]
  80. Dev Psychol. 2004 Mar;40(2):177-90 [PMID: 14979759]
  81. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2018 Jul;1424(1):52-63 [PMID: 29741275]
  82. Mem Cognit. 2001 Dec;29(8):1146-52 [PMID: 11913751]
  83. Trends Cogn Sci. 2012 Feb;16(2):129-35 [PMID: 22209601]
  84. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Sep;133(3):339-54 [PMID: 15355143]
  85. Memory. 1998 May;6(3):225-55 [PMID: 9709441]
  86. Memory. 2004 Nov;12(6):732-47 [PMID: 15724362]
  87. Vision Res. 2001;41(25-26):3559-65 [PMID: 11718795]
  88. Psychol Sci. 2025 Jan;36(1):19-34 [PMID: 39870052]
  89. Psychol Rev. 2001 Jul;108(3):624-52 [PMID: 11488380]
  90. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2021 Jun;21(3):561-572 [PMID: 33009653]
  91. Dev Psychol. 2021 Aug;57(8):1297-1317 [PMID: 34591573]
  92. Cogn Sci. 2014 Apr;38(3):537-64 [PMID: 24070616]
  93. Psychol Rev. 2011 Apr;118(2):175-92 [PMID: 21480738]
  94. J Cogn Neurosci. 1995 Winter;7(1):66-80 [PMID: 23961754]
  95. Cortex. 2020 Jan;122:108-114 [PMID: 30685062]
  96. Cogn Dev. 2025 Jan-Mar;73: [PMID: 39830083]
  97. Percept Mot Skills. 2000 Oct;91(2):603-15 [PMID: 11065324]
  98. Vis cogn. 2020;28(5-8):433-446 [PMID: 33841024]
  99. J Neurosci. 2019 May 15;39(20):3934-3947 [PMID: 30850512]
  100. Cognition. 2019 Dec;193:104012 [PMID: 31271925]

Grants

  1. R15 HD115244/NICHD NIH HHS

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0memoryworkingefforttrade-offcognitiveattention&environmentinformationversusmodelworkattendlimitedapproachinsightstowarddynamicshiftmechanismsunderlyingtaskpursuitgoal-relevantmaintaining-individualcontrolchildrenchildbalancemaintainwillsampling-rememberinglast50yearsvisualusedclassicpsychophysicalsetup:participantsinstructedremembersetitemssetupsidestepsrolemaximaltaskssimplestrategiesyieldedimportantprovidesclearpathintegrativetheoryKristjánssonDraschkow2021likestudyingtown'swalkabilitycollegestudentsrun50-yarddashrunsdangerfocusingedgecasestheoreticalopinionarticlearguerelationshipsagentunderstoodfunctionallylightagent'sgoalsmeansemphasisperformancenarrow"rememberitems!"naturalisticgoal"makesandwich!"LandHayhoe2001highlightexploitingpresentfeedbackweighssubjectiveaccessingexternalusingexistingmodelsbasedeconomicprinciplesKoolBotvinick2018particularlyinterestingoptimaluseinternalresourcesevencrucialmakesspecificpredictionsfutureresearch:1strikespreferred2orderimproveageincreasinglyremembering3oldershowgreateradaptabilitychangingdemandstogethergoals:developmentoffloadingextendedmindresourcerational

Similar Articles

Cited By