A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity.

Engle, Randall W · 2001 · OpenAlex

DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.169

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This paper investigates the theoretical nature of working-memory (WM) capacity, specifically testing the hypothesis that WM reflects a general, domain-free controlled-attention capability rather than task-specific processing skills. The authors challenge the view that WM span tasks correlate with complex cognition merely because they measure proficiency in the concurrent processing task (e.g., reading). Instead, they propose that WM capacity represents the ability to maintain task goals in an active state and inhibit interference from distractors. To test this, the study examines whether individual differences in WM capacity manifest in "molecular" attention tasks that require minimal memory storage but significant attentional control, specifically using prosaccade and antisaccade eye-movement tasks. The researchers conducted two experiments involving participants screened for high or low WM capacity using the operation-word span task. In Experiment 1, 203 participants performed a visual-orienting task where they identified target letters. In the prosaccade condition, a cue appeared at the target location, allowing for automatic orienting. In the antisaccade condition, the cue appeared opposite the target, requiring participants to inhibit the reflexive urge to look at the cue and instead direct attention to the opposite side. Experiment 2 involved 40 participants performing a similar task while eye movements were directly recorded across multiple blocks to assess practice effects and task-switching performance. The results demonstrated that high- and low-WM-span participants performed equivalently on prosaccade trials, indicating no difference in automatic orienting or basic perceptual speed. However, significant differences emerged in the antisaccade task. High-span participants were significantly faster and more accurate than low-span participants, who struggled to inhibit the reflexive response to the cue. In Experiment 2, eye-tracking data confirmed that low-span participants made slower and more erroneous saccades. Furthermore, low-span participants exhibited poor performance when switching from antisaccade to prosaccade blocks, suggesting difficulty in abandoning the controlled task set. Conversely, high-span participants maintained consistent performance regardless of task order. These findings support the controlled-attention view of working memory. The study concludes that WM capacity is fundamentally linked to the ability to maintain goal-relevant information and inhibit interference, particularly in conditions where habitual responses conflict with task goals. The equivalence in prosaccade performance rules out general perceptual or motor deficits in low-span individuals, isolating the deficit to attentional control. This implies that WM span tasks predict higher-order cognition not because of specific processing skills, but because they tap into a general executive mechanism responsible for managing interference and maintaining active goal states.

Key finding

Low-span participants were significantly slower and less accurate than high-span participants in the antisaccade task, while both groups performed equivalently in the prosaccade task.

Methodology

lab_experiment

Sample size: 243

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via openalex_abstract on 2026-05-08 (7 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• cognitive capacity variation
• working memory
• executive function
• attention