Working memory capacity, intelligence, and the magnitude of the attentional blink revisited

Martens, Sander; Johnson, Addie · 2009 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1007/s00221-008-1551-1

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

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

Summary

This study investigates the relationship between individual differences in working memory (WM) capacity, short-term memory (STM) capacity, general intelligence, and the magnitude of the attentional blink (AB). The AB is a phenomenon where individuals fail to identify a second target (T2) presented 200–500 ms after a first target (T1) in a rapid serial visual presentation. Previous research suggested that individuals with higher WM capacity might exhibit a reduced or absent AB due to superior attentional control and distractor rejection. This paper aims to test this hypothesis by examining whether these cognitive capacities predict AB magnitude in a large sample of healthy volunteers. The researchers recruited 97 participants from the University of Groningen community. They assessed WM capacity using symmetry span (spatial) and reading span (verbal) tasks, which require simultaneous processing and storage. STM capacity was measured using matrix span (spatial) and letter span (verbal) tasks, which involve storage without a processing component. General fluid intelligence was evaluated using Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM). The AB task required participants to identify two target letters embedded in a stream of digit distractors, with T2 appearing at lags of 1, 2, 3, or 8 items after T1. AB magnitude was calculated as the decrement in T2 accuracy relative to T1 performance at lags 2 and 3. The results demonstrated a robust AB effect, with significantly lower T2 identification accuracy at lags 2 and 3 compared to lags 1 and 8. However, contrary to the hypothesis, no significant correlations were found between AB magnitude and any of the memory or intelligence measures. Analyses of covariance and regression analyses confirmed that WM span, STM span, and APM scores did not predict individual differences in AB magnitude. While APM scores correlated with overall T1 accuracy, they did not correlate with T2 accuracy or the specific deficit associated with the AB. Furthermore, grouping participants by high, medium, or low scores on these cognitive tests revealed no significant differences in AB magnitude, except for a non-monotonic interaction with reading span that did not support the hypothesis that higher capacity reduces the blink. The study concludes that individual differences in WM capacity, STM capacity, and general intelligence do not account for variability in the magnitude of the attentional blink. These findings challenge the view that the AB is primarily driven by limitations in WM resources or general attentional control capacity. The authors suggest that the mechanisms underlying the AB may be distinct from those measured by standard WM and intelligence tasks, raising doubts about the generalizability of earlier reports linking WM capacity to AB reduction. This implies that the "dark side of attention" reflected in the AB may not be simply a matter of having insufficient memory storage or executive control resources.

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.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

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

• cognitive capacity variation
• working memory