ArticlePublisher preview available

Improving the Validity of the Armed Service Vocational Aptitude Battery with Measures of Attention Control

American Psychological Association
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition
Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

We evaluated the predictive value of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) at the latent level, using multitasking as a proxy for real-world job performance. We also examined whether adding measures of attention control to the ASVAB could improve its predictive validity. To answer these questions, data were collected from 171 young adults recruited from the Georgia Institute of Technology and the greater Atlanta community. Both regression and latent variable analyses revealed that the ASVAB does predict multitasking at the latent level but that measures of attention control add substantial predictive validity in explaining multitasking above and beyond the ASVAB, fluid intelligence, and processing speed. Theoretical as well as practical applications of these results are discussed in terms of theories of attention control, and potential cost savings in selection for military positions.
Journal
of
Applied
Research
in
Memory
and
Cognition
9
(2020)
323–335
Journal
of
Applied
Research
in
Memory
and
Cognition
Improving
the
Validity
of
the
Armed
Service
Vocational
Aptitude
Battery
with
Measures
of
Attention
Control
Jessie
Martin,
Cody
A.
Mashburn
and
Randall
W.
Engle
Georgia
Institute
of
Technology,
United
States
We
evaluated
the
predictive
value
of
the
Armed
Services
Vocational
Aptitude
Battery
(ASVAB)
at
the
latent
level,
using
multitasking
as
a
proxy
for
real-world
job
performance.
We
also
examined
whether
adding
measures
of
attention
control
to
the
ASVAB
could
improve
its
predictive
validity.
To
answer
these
questions,
data
were
collected
from
171
young
adults
recruited
from
the
Georgia
Institute
of
Technology
and
the
greater
Atlanta
community.
Both
regression
and
latent
variable
analyses
revealed
that
the
ASVAB
does
predict
multitasking
at
the
latent
level
but
that
measures
of
attention
control
add
substantial
predictive
validity
in
explaining
multitasking
above
and
beyond
the
ASVAB,
fluid
intelligence,
and
processing
speed.
Theoretical
as
well
as
practical
applications
of
these
results
are
discussed
in
terms
of
theories
of
attention
control,
and
potential
cost
savings
in
selection
for
military
positions.
General
Audience
Summary
This
study
served
as
an
in-house
test
to
see
if
we
could
improve
the
prediction
of
the
Armed
Services
Vocational
Aptitude
Battery
(ASVAB).
A
total
of
171
individuals
came
into
the
lab,
completed
a
series
of
practice
tests
(due
to
the
propriety
nature
of
the
ASVAB),
some
basic
measures
of
cognitive
ability,
and
measures
focused
on
the
ability
to
control
ones
attention.
We
then
measured
the
degree
to
which
these
abilities
predicted
performance
on
a
complex
series
of
computer-based
tasks
designed
to
approximate
real-world
job
performance.
Our
results
showed
that
while
the
ASVAB
does
a
good
job
of
predicting
complex
task
performance,
prediction
rates
are
improved
when
measures
of
attention
control
are
included
as
well.
From
this
data
set
we
have
selected
a
series
of
tasks
that
are
easy
to
administer
and
understand
which
we
suggest
be
included
in
testing
active
duty
personnel.
Keywords:
ASVAB,
Attention
control,
Multitasking,
Fluid
intelligence
The
United
States
military
has
a
vested
interest
in
maximiz-
ing
the
validity
of
its
selection
instruments.
One
such
instrument
is
the
Armed
Services
Vocational
Aptitude
Battery
(ASVAB).
The
ASVAB
is
a
standardized
test
administered
to
all
individuals
enlisting
in
the
United
States
military.
The
test
and
its
derivations
(e.g.,
the
Armed
Forces
Qualification
Test)
are
used
to
screen
and
select
personnel
for
jobs
across
all
branches
of
the
military
Author
Note
Jessie
Martin,
Cody
A.
Mashburn,
&
Randall
W.
Engle,
School
of
Psychol-
ogy,
Georgia
Institute
of
Technology,
Atlanta,
GA
30313,
United
States.
This
work
was
supported
by
a
grant
from
the
Office
of
Naval
Research
(N00014-12-1-1011)
to
Randall
Engle.
Correspondence
concerning
this
article
should
be
addressed
to
Jessie
Mar-
tin,
School
of
Psychology,
Georgia
Institute
of
Technology,
Atlanta,
GA
30313,
United
States.
Contact:
jessie.martin@gatech.edu.
and
were
designed
with
these
utilitarian
goals
in
mind.
Although
performance
on
the
ASVAB
approximates
some
more
psycho-
logically
informed
tests,
including
the
SAT
(Frey
&
Detterman,
2004),
the
ASVAB
was
constructed
relatively
independently
of
psychological
theory
surrounding
general
cognitive
abilities
and
intelligence
testing
(Roberts
et
al.,
2000).
As
such,
we
believe
that
the
addition
of
metrics
grounded
in
psychological
theory
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Content may be shared at no cost, but any requests to reuse this content in part or whole must go through the American Psychological Association.
... To ensure mission success, service members must maintain critical information in mind, identify targets accurately, manage distractions, and focus on task-relevant aspects of the environment. Although cognitive functioning has long been recognized as vital for mission success-playing a key role in the selection of elite forces and military occupational specialties (e.g., Beal, 2010;Picano et al., 2017;Martin et al., 2020)-the specific contributions of attentional control processes remain understudied as predictors of operationally relevant performance in military settings. ...
... Yet, military assessments have traditionally prioritized aptitude evaluations, such as the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), which primarily measures crystallized intelligence while overlooking fluid intelligence, memory, and learning ability (Roberts et al., 2000). Researchers have suggested that the predictive validity of the ASVAB can be improved by accounting for individuals' ability to control their attention (Martin et al., 2020), or that assessing other cognitive capacities, such as attentional vigilance, may be useful in predicting on-the-job performance in military contexts (Barron and Rose, 2017;Matthews et al., 2013;Trent and Barron, 2021). ...
... By demonstrating significant associations between cognitive performance in laboratory settings and simulated operational drills, our research contributes to understanding of the cognitive mechanisms underlying effective task execution in military contexts. As noted by others (Beal, 2010;Picano et al., 2017;Martin et al., 2020), incorporating attentional control assessments into soldier evaluations could offer valuable insights to inform selection for service and assignment to military occupational specialties. ...
Article
Full-text available
Introduction There is growing interest in understanding how individual differences in cognitive abilities contribute to military performance. Laboratory-based cognitive tasks, which are well-suited for assessing specific cognitive capacities, offer a controlled and efficient approach for evaluating these differences. If performance on such tasks corresponds with operationally relevant performance, these measures could serve as valuable tools for evaluation, selection, and targeted training interventions to enhance military readiness. Here, we examined associations between performance on laboratory tasks of attentional control and operationally relevant tasks in an augmented reality military training environment. Methods Across two study rounds, 45 squads of active-duty U.S. Army soldiers (N = 356) completed two laboratory-based tasks of attentional control and a series of operationally relevant drills, requiring attentional control. Results Soldiers’ performance on sustained attention and working memory tasks was positively correlated with their performance on operationally relevant drills. Specifically, in both rounds, individuals with greater sustained attention task accuracy performed better on a Shoot/Do Not Shoot drill. Conclusion The results indicate that laboratory-based attentional control tasks can serve as useful indicators of performance in military operationally relevant drills. Furthermore, these findings suggest that individual differences in attentional control may influence operationally relevant performance.
... At least some of this unexplained variance may be explained by Gf, placekeeping ability, and attention control. These factors have all been found to correlate strongly with multitasking performance as measured with synthetic work tasks (Burgoyne et al. 2021b;Hambrick et al. 2011;Redick et al. 2016;Martin et al. 2020), but the present study is the first to measure all three factors and multitasking performance in the same sample of participants. ...
... This study took place in four sessions, each lasting 1 to 1.5 h. Participants were tested in groups of up to 7. As is standard in individual difference research (e.g., Martin et al. 2020), the measures were collected in a fixed order to avoid participant × order interactions. Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). ...
... Attention control (AC). There were five attention control tasks (see additional details about the tasks in Martin et al. 2020, andDraheim et al. 2021). 4 In a trial of Sustained Attention to Cue, the participant saw a fixation cross for 2 or 3 s (quasi-randomly determined, half the trials for each duration), after which a 300 ms tone was played, followed by a white circle appearing in a randomly determined location, not at the center of the screen. ...
Article
Full-text available
Scores on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) predict military job (and training) performance better than any single variable so far identified. However, it remains unclear what factors explain this predictive relationship. Here, we investigated the contributions of fluid intelligence (Gf) and two executive functions—placekeeping ability and attention control—to the relationship between the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) score from the ASVAB and job-relevant multitasking performance. Psychometric network analyses revealed that Gf and placekeeping ability independently contributed to and largely explained the AFQT–multitasking performance relationship. The contribution of attention control to this relationship was negligible. However, attention control did relate positively and significantly to Gf and placekeeping ability, consistent with the hypothesis that it is a cognitive “primitive” underlying the individual differences in higher-level cognition. Finally, hierarchical regression analyses revealed stronger evidence for the incremental validity of Gf and placekeeping ability in the prediction of multitasking performance than for the incremental validity of attention control. The results shed light on factors that may underlie the predictive validity of global measures of cognitive ability and suggest how the ASVAB might be augmented to improve its predictive validity.
... Individual differences in the ability to control attention are correlated with a wide range of important outcomes, from cognitive task performance Conway et al., 2002;Draheim et al., 2021, Draheim, Pak, et al., 2022Engle et al., 1999;Martin, Mashburn, & Engle, 2020;McVay & Kane, 2012) and academic achievement (Ahmed et al., 2019;Best et al., 2011) to health behaviors (Allan et al., 2016;Hall et al., 2008) and emotion regulation (Baumeister et al., 2013;Schmeichel & Demaree, 2010;Zelazo & Cunningham, 2007). As such, considerable time and effort have been invested in research on the nature of individual differences in attention control and their measurement (Lezak, 1982;McCabe et al., 2010;Willoughby et al., 2011;Zelazo et al., 2013). ...
... Indeed, the evidence suggests that individual differences in attention control and other cognitive abilities play a role in multitasking. For example, Martin, Mashburn, and Engle (2020) examined the relative contributions of attention control, fluid intelligence, and performance on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery to multitasking ability at the latent level. On its own, the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery-a standardized test used by the U.S. military for personnel selection-accounted for a majority of the variance in multitasking performance. ...
... Thus, attention control and fluid intelligence appear to capture significant unique variance in multitasking ability at the latent level, above and beyond one another. Martin, Mashburn, and Engle (2020) also explored whether processing speed accounted for variance in multitasking ability that was previously attributed to attention control. Instead, they found the opposite: including processing speed did not add significant predictive value to the model, whereas the path from attention control to multitasking ability remained statistically significant and similar in magnitude. ...
Article
Full-text available
Individual differences in the ability to control attention are correlated with a wide range of important outcomes, from academic achievement and job performance to health behaviors and emotion regulation. Nevertheless, the theoretical nature of attention control as a cognitive construct has been the subject of heated debate, spurred on by psychometric issues that have stymied efforts to reliably measure differences in the ability to control attention. For theory to advance, our measures must improve. We introduce three efficient, reliable, and valid tests of attention control that each take less than 3 min to administer: Stroop Squared, Flanker Squared, and Simon Squared. Two studies (online and in-lab) comprising more than 600 participants demonstrate that the three “Squared” tasks have great internal consistency (avg. = .95) and test–retest reliability across sessions (avg. r = .67). Latent variable analyses revealed that the Squared tasks loaded highly on a common factor (avg. loading = .70), which was strongly correlated with an attention control factor based on established measures (avg. r = .81). Moreover, attention control correlated strongly with fluid intelligence, working memory capacity, and processing speed and helped explain their covariation. We found that the Squared attention control tasks accounted for 75% of the variance in multitasking ability at the latent level, and that fluid intelligence, attention control, and processing speed fully accounted for individual differences in multitasking ability. Our results suggest that Stroop Squared, Flanker Squared, and Simon Squared are reliable and valid measures of attention control. The tasks are freely available online: https://osf.io/7q598/.
... On the other hand, ANT is a performance-based task that measures the efficiency of different attention networks (alerting, orienting, and executive control) in the brain. Using ANT to validate ATTC can be advantageous as it complements self-reported data with objective performance-based data, providing a more holistic view of an individual's attentional control capacities [22,23]. ...
... This suggests that ANT can be effectively used in different settings to validate the ATTC, which is important for generalizing the findings to various contexts. Also, the authors of [22,23,25] mention that the ANT is a suitable choice for observing ATTC due to its ability to provide objective, performance-based data that complement the self-reported nature of ATTC, its coverage of a broad range of attentional processes, and its potential to demonstrate the neural correlates and broader implications of attentional control. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background: The Attention Control Scale (ATTC) is a widely used self-report measure of attentional control capacities. However, research questions whether it accurately substitutes for objective attention control tasks. This study investigated ATTC's correlation with the Attention Network Test (ANT) across alerting, orienting, and executive control networks. We also used the Inverse Efficiency Score (IES) as an additional factor to check ATTC using ANT. Methods: We administered 143 participants who completed the ATTC questionnaire and ANT behavioral test assessing network efficiencies. Results: The results showed non-significant ATTC-ANT correlations across all networks. In an additional analysis, while the ATTC demonstrated factorial validity, subjective control was disconnected from actual attention regulation efficiency. A small male advantage emerged for executive control. Conclusions: Dissociations likely stem from attention complexity and method variances rather than overlap. The findings do not support the ATTC as a stand-alone proxy for performance-based measurement. Multifaceted assessments are essential for comprehensively capturing attentional control.
Article
A meta-analysis and re-analysis of prior latent variable studies was conducted in order to assess whether there is evidence for individual differences in broad attention control abilities. Data from 90 independent samples and over 23,000 participants suggested that most (84.4%) prior studies find evidence for a coherent attention control factor with average factor loadings of .51. This latent attention control factor was related to other cognitive ability factors including working memory, shifting, fluid intelligence, long-term memory, reading comprehension, and processing speed, as well as to self-reports of task-unrelated thoughts and task specific motivation. Further re-analyses and meta-analyses suggest that the results remained largely unchanged when considering various possible measurement issues. Examining the factor structure of attention control suggested evidence for sub-components of attention control (restraining, constraining and sustaining attention) which could be accounted for a by a higher-order factor. Additional re-analyses suggested that attention control represents a broad ability within models of cognitive abilities. Overall, these results provide evidence for attention control abilities as an important individual differences construct.
Article
Full-text available
Early work on selective attention used auditory-based tasks, such as dichotic listening, to shed light on capacity limitations and individual differences in these limitations. Today, there is great interest in individual differences in attentional abilities, but the field has shifted towards visual-modality tasks. Furthermore, most conflict-based tests of attention control lack reliability due to low signal-to-noise ratios and the use of difference scores. Critically, it is unclear to what extent attention control generalizes across sensory modalities, and without reliable auditory-based tests, an answer to this question will remain elusive. To this end, we developed three auditory-based tests of attention control that use an adaptive response deadline (DL) to account for speed–accuracy trade-offs: Auditory Simon DL, Auditory Flanker DL, and Auditory Stroop DL. In a large sample (N = 316), we investigated the psychometric properties of the three auditory conflict tasks, tested whether attention control is better modeled as a unitary factor or modality-specific factors, and estimated the extent to which unique variance in modality-specific factors contributed incrementally to the prediction of dichotic listening and multitasking performance. Our analyses indicated that the auditory conflict tasks have strong psychometric properties and demonstrate convergent validity with visual tests of attention control. Auditory and visual attention control factors were highly correlated (r = .81)—even after controlling for perceptual processing speed (r = .75). Modality-specific attention control factors accounted for unique variance in modality-matched criterion measures, but the majority of the explained variance was modality-general. The results suggest an interplay between modality-general attention control and modality-specific processing.
Article
Full-text available
Cognitive control has been typically examined using single-item tasks. This has implications for the generalizability of theories of control implementation. Previous studies have revealed that different control demands are posed by tasks depending on whether they present stimuli individually (i.e., single-item) or simultaneously in array format (i.e., multi-item). In the present study, we tracked within-task performance in single-item and multi-item Stroop tasks using simultaneous pupillometry, gaze, and behavioral response measures, aiming to explore the implications of format differences for cognitive control. The results indicated within-task performance decline in the multi-item version of the Stroop task, accompanied by pupil constriction and dwell time increase, in both the incongruent and the neutral condition. In contrast, no performance decline or dwell time increase was observed in the course of the single-item version of the task. We interpret these findings in terms of capacity constraints on cognitive control, with implications for cognitive control research, and highlight the need for better understanding of the cognitive demands of multi-item tasks.
Article
Context Does lower baseline cognitive function predispose athletes to ACL injury risk, especially when performing unplanned or dual-task movements? Objective To evaluate the association between cognitive function and biomechanics related to ACL injuries during cognitively challenging sports movements. Data Sources PubMed (MEDLINE), Web of Science, Scopus, and SciELO databases were searched; additional hand searching was also conducted. Study Selection The following inclusion criteria had to be met: participants completed (1) a neurocognitive test, (2) a cognitively challenging sport-related task involving lower limbs, and (3) a biomechanical analysis. The following criteria determined exclusion from the review: studies involving participants with (1) recent or current musculoskeletal injuries; (2) recent or current concussion; (3) ACL surgical reconstruction, reviews of the literature, commentary or opinion articles, and case studies. Study Design Systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) statement and registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Level of Evidence Level 3. Data Extraction Two of authors independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of the articles with the Downs and Black and ROBINS-I checklists, to assess methodological quality and risk of bias, respectively. Results Six studies with different methodologies and confounding factors were included in this review. Of these 6 studies, 3 were ranked as high-quality, 3 demonstrated a low risk of bias, 2 a moderate risk, and 1 a severe risk. Five studies found a cognitive-motor relationship, with worse cognitive performance associated with increased injury risk, with 1 study reporting the opposite directionality for 1 variable. One study did not identify any interaction between cognitive function and biomechanical outcomes. Conclusion Worse cognitive performance is associated with an increased injury risk profile during cognitively challenging movements.
Article
Historically, there has been substantial disagreement about the importance of speed vs. level in determining individual differences in intelligence – a disagreement that persists across various different modern assessment measures of intellectual abilities. The current investigation considers whether changes to the administration constraints (time limitations or speededness, and total test length) of the Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices test – which has been identified as a measure highly saturated with general intelligence – results in differences to the underlying ability determinants of test performance. A review of empirical studies was conducted, where versions of Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices Tests were administered under various time constraints and item lengths. Meta-analytic techniques were used to determine whether introducing speed constraints or shortening the length of the test changes the construct validity of the tests (as indicated by differences in convergent and discriminant correlations with other ability traits). The meta-analysis combined results from 142 studies composed of a total of 26,848 participants. Substantial differences were found for correlations of Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices and Spatial Visualization (as large as ρ̂ = 0.26), Memory (as large as ρ̂ = 0.08), and Perceptual Speed (as large as ρ̂ = 0.34) abilities under speeded conditions and shorter test lengths. Examinees may draw on different strategies for test performance, that in turn, draw on different combinations of abilities, when the test is abbreviated or significant time constraints are introduced. Implications for using this test under different conditions are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
Cognitive tasks that produce reliable and robust effects at the group level often fail to yield reliable and valid individual differences. An ongoing debate among attention researchers is whether conflict resolution mechanisms are task-specific or domain-general, and the lack of correlation between most attention measures seems to favor the view that attention control is not a unitary concept. We have argued that the use of difference scores, particularly in reaction time (RT), is the primary cause of null and conflicting results at the individual differences level, and that methodological issues with existing tasks preclude making strong theoretical conclusions. The present article is an empirical test of this view in which we used a toolbox approach to develop and validate new tasks hypothesized to reflect attention processes. Here, we administered existing, modified, and new attention tasks to over 400 participants (final N = 396). Compared with the traditional Stroop and flanker tasks, performance on the accuracy-based measures was more reliable, had stronger intercorrelations, formed a more coherent latent factor, and had stronger associations to measures of working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. Further, attention control fully accounted for the relationship between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. These results show that accuracy-based measures can be better suited to individual differences investigations than traditional RT tasks, particularly when the goal is to maximize prediction. We conclude that attention control is a unitary concept. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Article
Full-text available
Reaction time is believed to be a good indicator of the speed and efficiency of mental processes and is a ubiquitous variable in the behavioral sciences. Despite this popularity, there are numerous issues associated with using reaction time (RT), specifically in differential and developmental research. Here, we identify and focus on two main problems-unreliability and sensitivity to speed-accuracy interactions. The use of difference scores is a primary factor that leads to many RT measures having demonstrably low reliability, and RT measures in general often do not properly account for speed-accuracy interactions. Both factors jeopardize the validity and interpretability of results based on RT. Here, we evaluate conceptually and empirically how these issues affect individual differences research. Although the empirical evidence we provide are primarily within the domains of attention control and task switching, we highlight examples from various other areas of psychological inquiry. We also discuss many of the statistical and methodological alternatives available to researchers conducting correlational studies. Ultimately, we encourage researchers comparing individuals of differing cognitive and developmental levels to strongly consider using these alternatives in lieu of RT, specifically RT difference scores.
Article
Full-text available
In the last two decades, individual-differences research has put forward 3 cognitive psychometric constructs: executive control (i.e., the ability to monitor and control ongoing thoughts and actions), working memory capacity (WMC, i.e., the ability to retain access to a limited amount of information in the service of complex tasks), and fluid intelligence (gF, i.e., the ability to reason with novel information). These constructs have been proposed to be closely related, but previous research failed to substantiate a strong correlation between executive control and the other two constructs. This might arise from the difficulty in establishing executive control as a latent variable and from differences in the way the 3 constructs are measured (i.e., executive control is typically measured through reaction times, whereas WMC and gF are measured through accuracy). The purpose of the present study was to overcome these difficulties by measuring executive control through accuracy. Despite good reliabilities of all measures, structural equation modeling identified no coherent factor of executive control. Furthermore, WMC and gF-modeled as distinct but correlated factors-were unrelated to the individual measures of executive control. Hence, measuring executive control through accuracy did not overcome the difficulties of establishing executive control as a latent variable. These findings call into question the existence of executive control as a psychometric construct and the assumption that WMC and gF are closely related to the ability to control ongoing thoughts and actions.
Article
Full-text available
In 2 experiments the authors examined whether individual differences in working-memory (WM) capacity are related to attentional control. Experiment 1 tested high- and low-WM-span (high-span and low-span) participants in a prosaccade task, in which a visual cue appeared in the same location as a subsequent to-be-identified target letter, and in an antisaccade task, in which a target appeared opposite the cued location. Span groups identified targets equally well in the prosaccade task, reflecting equivalence in automatic orienting. However, low-span participants were slower and less accurate than high-span participants in the antisaccade task, reflecting differences in attentional control. Experiment 2 measured eye movements across a long antisaccade session. Low-span participants made slower and more erroneous saccades than did high-span participants. In both experiments, low-span participants performed poorly when task switching from antisaccade to prosaccade blocks. The findings support a controlled-attention view of WM capacity.
Article
Full-text available
Although multitasking has been identified as an important competency for many jobs, standardized preemployment tests of multitasking are uncommon, and their validity beyond separate single-task assessments is unclear. To address this gap, this study compared the validity of a preemployment multitasking assessment (with math, memorization, and monitoring tasks presented concurrently) to an assessment in which the same constituent tasks were assessed separately. Among military pilot applicants, concurrent multitasking predicted both flying and academic performance, whereas serial single-task scores and their combination predicted only academic performance. Larger multitasking decrements (i.e., operationalized as the difference between single-task and multiple-task performance of the same constituent tasks) were associated with poorer flying performance. Results suggest the potential utility of multitasking assessments in selection for military jobs requiring competing, concurrent task demands.
Article
Full-text available
Working memory capacity and fluid intelligence have been demonstrated to be strongly correlated traits. Typically, high working memory capacity is believed to facilitate reasoning through accurate maintenance of relevant information. In this article, we present a proposal reframing this issue, such that tests of working memory capacity and fluid intelligence are seen as measuring complementary processes that facilitate complex cognition. Respectively, these are the ability to maintain access to critical information and the ability to disengage from or block outdated information. In the realm of problem solving, high working memory capacity allows a person to represent and maintain a problem accurately and stably, so that hypothesis testing can be conducted. However, as hypotheses are disproven or become untenable, disengaging from outdated problem solving attempts becomes important so that new hypotheses can be generated and tested. From this perspective, the strong correlation between working memory capacity and fluid intelligence is due not to one ability having a causal influence on the other but to separate attention-demanding mental functions that can be contrary to one another but are organized around top-down processing goals.
Article
Full-text available
The ability of police and jurors to make informed, unbiased decisions is paramount to the integrity of the legal system. Police and jurors as decision-makers follow procedures ensuring that individuals receive a fair trial from the time of arrest to sentencing. However this process has come under public scrutiny with recent negative media attention focused on police shootings, aggressive handling or interrogation of suspects, and jurors' seemingly biased treatment of minority group members. Most researchers studying factors that motivate police and juror behavior focus on the external influences of decision-making, such as the climate of violence in a neighborhood, or culturally-entrenched criminal stereotypes. Fewer have focused on the cognitive factors that impact the internal decision-making processes. In this review we compile the research on individual differences in cognitive ability (e.g., working memory capacity) and event circumstances (e.g., high emotion, attention load), that influence police and jury decision-making. The majority of studies in this area are laboratory-based which may attenuate the transfer of findings to real-world settings, but cognitive mechanisms engaged in the field are likely similar. Overall, this review suggests that overload of cognitive capacity reduces controlled processing ability, which may work to undermine the reliability of decision-making at all phases of the legal process. Field studies are needed to better understand when decision-makers may be overburdened, and what interventions are most appropriate.
Article
Full-text available
Previous research has identified several cognitive abilities that are important for multitasking, but few studies have attempted to measure a general multitasking ability using a diverse set of multitasks. In the final dataset, 534 young adult subjects completed measures of working memory, attention control, fluid intelligence, and multitasking. Correlations, hierarchical regression analyses, confirmatory factor analyses, structural equation models, and relative weight analyses revealed several key findings. First, although the complex tasks used to assess multitasking differed greatly in their task characteristics and demands, a coherent construct specific to multitasking ability was identified. Second, the cognitive ability predictors accounted for substantial variance in the general multitasking construct, with working memory and fluid intelligence accounting for the most multitasking variance compared to attention control. Third, the magnitude of the relationships among the cognitive abilities and multitasking varied as a function of the complexity and structure of the various multitasks assessed. Finally, structural equation models based on a multi-faceted model of working memory indicated that attention control and capacity fully mediated the working memory and multitasking relationship.
Article
In this follow-up to my 2002 article on working memory capacity, fluid intelligence, and executive attention in Current Directions in Psychological Science, I review even more evidence supporting the idea that the ability to control one’s attention (i.e., executive attention) is important to working memory and fluid intelligence. I now argue that working memory tasks reflect primarily the maintenance of information, whereas fluid intelligence tests reflect primarily the ability to disengage from recently attended and no longer useful information. I also point out some conclusions in the 2002 article that now appear to be wrong.
Chapter
This publication is the opening number of a series which the Psychometric Society proposes to issue. It reports the first large experimental inquiry, carried out by the methods of factor analysis described by Thurstone in The Vectors of the Mind 1. The work was made possible by financial grants from the Social Science Research Committee of the University of Chicago, the American Council of Education, and the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The results are eminently worthy of the assistance so generously accorded. Thurstone’s previous theoretical account, lucid and comprehensive as it is, is intelligible only to those who have a knowledge of matrix algebra. Hence his methods have become known to British educationists chiefly from the monograph published by W. P. Alexander8. This enquiry has provoked a good deal of criticism, particularly from Professor Spearman’s school ; and differs, as a matter of fact, from Thurstone’s later expositions. Hence it is of the greatest value to have a full and simple illustration of his methods, based on a concrete inquiry, from Professor Thurstone himself.