The neglected contribution of memory encoding in spatial cueing: A new theory of costs and benefits

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Spatial cueing is thought to indicate the resource limits of visual attention because invalidly cued items are reported more slowly and less accurately than validly cued items. However, limited resource accounts cannot explain certain findings, such as dividing attention without costs, or attentional benefits without invalidity costs. The current study presents a new account of exogenous cueing, namely the memory encoding cost (MEC) theory, which integrates attention and memory encoding to explain costs and benefits evoked by a spatial cue. Unlike conventional theories that focus on the role of attention in yielding spatial cueing effects, the MEC theory argues that some cueing effects are caused by a combination of attentional facilitation evoked by the cue, but also the cost of encoding the cue into memory. The crucial implication of this theory is that limitations in attentional deployment may not necessarily be the cause of invalidity costs. MEC generates a number of predictions that we test here, providing five convergent lines of evidence that cue encoding plays a key role in producing cueing effects. Furthermore, the MEC suggests a common mechanism underlying cueing costs and the attentional blink, and we simulate the core empirical findings of the current study with an existing attentional blink model. The model was able to simulate these effects primarily through manipulation of a single parameter that corresponds to memory encoding. The MEC theory thus simplifies our theoretical understanding of attentional effects by linking the attentional blink and some varieties of spatial cueing costs to a common mechanism.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)936-968
Number of pages33
JournalPsychological Review
Volume125
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2018

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Attentional Blink
Cues

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Psychology(all)

Cite this

@article{925cd6513bc448ed893f622bf32c796c,
title = "The neglected contribution of memory encoding in spatial cueing: A new theory of costs and benefits",
abstract = "Spatial cueing is thought to indicate the resource limits of visual attention because invalidly cued items are reported more slowly and less accurately than validly cued items. However, limited resource accounts cannot explain certain findings, such as dividing attention without costs, or attentional benefits without invalidity costs. The current study presents a new account of exogenous cueing, namely the memory encoding cost (MEC) theory, which integrates attention and memory encoding to explain costs and benefits evoked by a spatial cue. Unlike conventional theories that focus on the role of attention in yielding spatial cueing effects, the MEC theory argues that some cueing effects are caused by a combination of attentional facilitation evoked by the cue, but also the cost of encoding the cue into memory. The crucial implication of this theory is that limitations in attentional deployment may not necessarily be the cause of invalidity costs. MEC generates a number of predictions that we test here, providing five convergent lines of evidence that cue encoding plays a key role in producing cueing effects. Furthermore, the MEC suggests a common mechanism underlying cueing costs and the attentional blink, and we simulate the core empirical findings of the current study with an existing attentional blink model. The model was able to simulate these effects primarily through manipulation of a single parameter that corresponds to memory encoding. The MEC theory thus simplifies our theoretical understanding of attentional effects by linking the attentional blink and some varieties of spatial cueing costs to a common mechanism.",
author = "Hui Chen and Wyble, {Bradley Paul}",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1037/rev0000116",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "125",
pages = "936--968",
journal = "Psychological Review",
issn = "0033-295X",
publisher = "American Psychological Association Inc.",
number = "6",

}

The neglected contribution of memory encoding in spatial cueing : A new theory of costs and benefits. / Chen, Hui; Wyble, Bradley Paul.

In: Psychological Review, Vol. 125, No. 6, 01.11.2018, p. 936-968.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - The neglected contribution of memory encoding in spatial cueing

T2 - A new theory of costs and benefits

AU - Chen, Hui

AU - Wyble, Bradley Paul

PY - 2018/11/1

Y1 - 2018/11/1

N2 - Spatial cueing is thought to indicate the resource limits of visual attention because invalidly cued items are reported more slowly and less accurately than validly cued items. However, limited resource accounts cannot explain certain findings, such as dividing attention without costs, or attentional benefits without invalidity costs. The current study presents a new account of exogenous cueing, namely the memory encoding cost (MEC) theory, which integrates attention and memory encoding to explain costs and benefits evoked by a spatial cue. Unlike conventional theories that focus on the role of attention in yielding spatial cueing effects, the MEC theory argues that some cueing effects are caused by a combination of attentional facilitation evoked by the cue, but also the cost of encoding the cue into memory. The crucial implication of this theory is that limitations in attentional deployment may not necessarily be the cause of invalidity costs. MEC generates a number of predictions that we test here, providing five convergent lines of evidence that cue encoding plays a key role in producing cueing effects. Furthermore, the MEC suggests a common mechanism underlying cueing costs and the attentional blink, and we simulate the core empirical findings of the current study with an existing attentional blink model. The model was able to simulate these effects primarily through manipulation of a single parameter that corresponds to memory encoding. The MEC theory thus simplifies our theoretical understanding of attentional effects by linking the attentional blink and some varieties of spatial cueing costs to a common mechanism.

AB - Spatial cueing is thought to indicate the resource limits of visual attention because invalidly cued items are reported more slowly and less accurately than validly cued items. However, limited resource accounts cannot explain certain findings, such as dividing attention without costs, or attentional benefits without invalidity costs. The current study presents a new account of exogenous cueing, namely the memory encoding cost (MEC) theory, which integrates attention and memory encoding to explain costs and benefits evoked by a spatial cue. Unlike conventional theories that focus on the role of attention in yielding spatial cueing effects, the MEC theory argues that some cueing effects are caused by a combination of attentional facilitation evoked by the cue, but also the cost of encoding the cue into memory. The crucial implication of this theory is that limitations in attentional deployment may not necessarily be the cause of invalidity costs. MEC generates a number of predictions that we test here, providing five convergent lines of evidence that cue encoding plays a key role in producing cueing effects. Furthermore, the MEC suggests a common mechanism underlying cueing costs and the attentional blink, and we simulate the core empirical findings of the current study with an existing attentional blink model. The model was able to simulate these effects primarily through manipulation of a single parameter that corresponds to memory encoding. The MEC theory thus simplifies our theoretical understanding of attentional effects by linking the attentional blink and some varieties of spatial cueing costs to a common mechanism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051199039&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051199039&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1037/rev0000116

DO - 10.1037/rev0000116

M3 - Article

C2 - 30080067

AN - SCOPUS:85051199039

VL - 125

SP - 936

EP - 968

JO - Psychological Review

JF - Psychological Review

SN - 0033-295X

IS - 6

ER -