Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters.

Samantha E. A. Gregory, Margaret C. Jackson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Joint focus of attention between two individuals can influence the way that observers attend, encode, and value items. Using a nonpredictive gaze cuing task we previously found that working memory (WM) was better for jointly attended (validly cued) versus invalidly cued colored squares. Here we examine whether this influence of gaze on WM is driven by observers sharing the perspective of the face cue (mental state account), or simply by increased attention to the cued location (social attention account). To manipulate perspective taking, a closed barrier obstructed the cue face’s view of the memoranda, while an open barrier allowed the cue face to “see” the colors. A central cue face flanked by two identical barriers looked left or right, followed 500 ms later by colored squares for encoding which appeared equally often in the validly and invalidly cued locations. After a blank 1000 ms maintenance interval, participants stated whether a probe color was present or not in the preceding display. When the barrier was open, WM was significantly impaired for invalidly versus validly cued items. When the barrier was closed, the effect of gaze cues on WM was abolished. In contrast, further experiments showed a significant cuing effect on the speed of simple target localization and color discrimination regardless of barrier type. These findings support the mental state account of joint attention in WM, whereby the attentional focus of another alters WM via higher level engagement with the second person perspective. A goal-specific model of perspective taking is proposed.
Original languageEnglish
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 19 Jul 2018

Fingerprint

Short-Term Memory
Cues
Color
Joints
Maintenance

Bibliographical note

©American Psychological Association, 2018. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: DOI 10.1037/xlm0000622

Cite this

Gregory, S. E. A., & Jackson, M. C. (2018). Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000622
Gregory, Samantha E. A. ; Jackson, Margaret C. / Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2018.
@article{e2c31038961b4f458737c976d627d701,
title = "Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters.",
abstract = "Joint focus of attention between two individuals can influence the way that observers attend, encode, and value items. Using a nonpredictive gaze cuing task we previously found that working memory (WM) was better for jointly attended (validly cued) versus invalidly cued colored squares. Here we examine whether this influence of gaze on WM is driven by observers sharing the perspective of the face cue (mental state account), or simply by increased attention to the cued location (social attention account). To manipulate perspective taking, a closed barrier obstructed the cue face’s view of the memoranda, while an open barrier allowed the cue face to “see” the colors. A central cue face flanked by two identical barriers looked left or right, followed 500 ms later by colored squares for encoding which appeared equally often in the validly and invalidly cued locations. After a blank 1000 ms maintenance interval, participants stated whether a probe color was present or not in the preceding display. When the barrier was open, WM was significantly impaired for invalidly versus validly cued items. When the barrier was closed, the effect of gaze cues on WM was abolished. In contrast, further experiments showed a significant cuing effect on the speed of simple target localization and color discrimination regardless of barrier type. These findings support the mental state account of joint attention in WM, whereby the attentional focus of another alters WM via higher level engagement with the second person perspective. A goal-specific model of perspective taking is proposed.",
author = "Gregory, {Samantha E. A.} and Jackson, {Margaret C.}",
note = "{\circledC}American Psychological Association, 2018. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: DOI 10.1037/xlm0000622",
year = "2018",
month = "7",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1037/xlm0000622",
language = "English",

}

Gregory, SEA & Jackson, MC 2018, 'Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters.', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000622

Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters. / Gregory, Samantha E. A.; Jackson, Margaret C.

In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19.07.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters.

AU - Gregory, Samantha E. A.

AU - Jackson, Margaret C.

N1 - ©American Psychological Association, 2018. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. Please do not copy or cite without author's permission. The final article is available, upon publication, at: DOI 10.1037/xlm0000622

PY - 2018/7/19

Y1 - 2018/7/19

N2 - Joint focus of attention between two individuals can influence the way that observers attend, encode, and value items. Using a nonpredictive gaze cuing task we previously found that working memory (WM) was better for jointly attended (validly cued) versus invalidly cued colored squares. Here we examine whether this influence of gaze on WM is driven by observers sharing the perspective of the face cue (mental state account), or simply by increased attention to the cued location (social attention account). To manipulate perspective taking, a closed barrier obstructed the cue face’s view of the memoranda, while an open barrier allowed the cue face to “see” the colors. A central cue face flanked by two identical barriers looked left or right, followed 500 ms later by colored squares for encoding which appeared equally often in the validly and invalidly cued locations. After a blank 1000 ms maintenance interval, participants stated whether a probe color was present or not in the preceding display. When the barrier was open, WM was significantly impaired for invalidly versus validly cued items. When the barrier was closed, the effect of gaze cues on WM was abolished. In contrast, further experiments showed a significant cuing effect on the speed of simple target localization and color discrimination regardless of barrier type. These findings support the mental state account of joint attention in WM, whereby the attentional focus of another alters WM via higher level engagement with the second person perspective. A goal-specific model of perspective taking is proposed.

AB - Joint focus of attention between two individuals can influence the way that observers attend, encode, and value items. Using a nonpredictive gaze cuing task we previously found that working memory (WM) was better for jointly attended (validly cued) versus invalidly cued colored squares. Here we examine whether this influence of gaze on WM is driven by observers sharing the perspective of the face cue (mental state account), or simply by increased attention to the cued location (social attention account). To manipulate perspective taking, a closed barrier obstructed the cue face’s view of the memoranda, while an open barrier allowed the cue face to “see” the colors. A central cue face flanked by two identical barriers looked left or right, followed 500 ms later by colored squares for encoding which appeared equally often in the validly and invalidly cued locations. After a blank 1000 ms maintenance interval, participants stated whether a probe color was present or not in the preceding display. When the barrier was open, WM was significantly impaired for invalidly versus validly cued items. When the barrier was closed, the effect of gaze cues on WM was abolished. In contrast, further experiments showed a significant cuing effect on the speed of simple target localization and color discrimination regardless of barrier type. These findings support the mental state account of joint attention in WM, whereby the attentional focus of another alters WM via higher level engagement with the second person perspective. A goal-specific model of perspective taking is proposed.

UR - https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-33657-001?doi=1

U2 - 10.1037/xlm0000622

DO - 10.1037/xlm0000622

M3 - Article

ER -

Gregory SEA, Jackson MC. Barriers block the effect of joint attention on working memory: Perspective taking matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 2018 Jul 19. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000622