Using games to understand the mind.

Board, card or video games have been played by virtually every individual in the world. Games are popular because they are intuitive and fun. These distinctive qualities of games also make them ideal for studying the mind. By being intuitive, games provide a unique vantage point for understanding the inductive biases that support behaviour in more complex, ecological settings than traditional laboratory experiments. By being fun, games allow researchers to study new questions in cognition such as the meaning of 'play' and intrinsic motivation, while also supporting more extensive and diverse data collection by attracting many more participants. We describe the advantages and drawbacks of using games relative to standard laboratory-based experiments and lay out a set of recommendations on how to gain the most from using games to study cognition. We hope this Perspective will lead to a wider use of games as experimental paradigms, elevating the ecological validity, scale and robustness of research on the mind.

How does chunking help working memory?

Chunking is the recoding of smaller units of information into larger, familiar units. Chunking is often assumed to help bypassing the limited capacity of working memory (WM). We investigate how chunks are used in WM tasks, addressing three questions: (a) Does chunking reduce the load on WM? Across four experiments chunking benefits were found not only for recall of the chunked but also of other not-chunked information concurrently held in WM, supporting the assumption that chunking reduces load. (b) Is the chunking benefit independent of chunk size? The chunking benefit was independent of chunk size only if the chunks were composed of unique elements, so that each chunk could be replaced by its first element (Experiment 1), but not when several chunks consisted of overlapping sets of elements, disabling this replacement strategy (Experiments 2 and 3). The chunk-size effect is not due to differences in rehearsal duration as it persisted when participants were required to perform articulatory suppression (Experiment 3). Hence, WM capacity is not limited to a fixed number of chunks regardless of their size. (c) Does the chunking benefit depend on the serial position of the chunk? Chunks in early list positions improved recall of other, not-chunked material, but chunks at the end of the list did not. We conclude that a chunk reduces the load on WM via retrieval of a compact chunk representation from long-term memory that replaces the representations of individual elements of the chunk. This frees up capacity for subsequently encoded material. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

The precision of spatial selection into the focus of attention in working memory.

Attention helps manage the information held in visual working memory (vWM). Perceptual attention selects the stimuli to be represented in vWM, whereas internal attention prioritizes information already in vWM. In the present study we assessed the spatial precision of perceptual and internal attention in vWM. Participants encoded eight colored dots for a local-recognition test. To manipulate attention, a cue indicated the item most likely to be tested (~65% validity). The cue appeared either before the onset of the memory array (precue) or during the retention interval (retrocue). The precue guides perceptual attention to gate encoding into vWM, whereas the retrocue guides internal attention to prioritize the cued item within vWM. If attentional selection is spatially imprecise, attention should be preferentially allocated to the cued location, with a gradual drop-off of attention over space to nearby uncued locations. In this case, memory for uncued locations should vary as a function of their distance from the cued location. As compared to a no-cue condition, memory was better for validly cued items but worse for uncued items. The spatial distance between the uncued and cued locations modulated the cuing costs: Items close in space to the cued location were insulated from cuing costs. The extension of this spatial proximity effect was larger for precues than for retrocues, mostly because the benefits of attention were larger for precues. These results point to similar selection principles between perceptual and internal attention and to a critical role of spatial distance in the selection of visual representations.

Domain-specific interference between storage and processing in complex span is driven by cognitive and motor operations.

The role of domain-specific interference in the complex-span paradigm is still controversial. Here we distinguish two operations within the processing task of this paradigm-a cognitive operation to solve the task and a motor operation to give the answer. Their domain-specific interference with maintenance was investigated within the complex-span paradigm. Presentation of the memoranda-six words or four spatially distributed dots-was interleaved with the presentation of letter pairs to be processed. Cognitive operation domain was manipulated by asking participants to make either a rhyme judgment or a symmetry judgment for each letter pair. Motor operation domain was varied by requiring a response by either speaking or pointing. Cognitive load was held constant. Cognitive and motor operation showed separate domain-specific effects on memory: Visuospatial memory was impaired more by visuospatial than verbal cognitive operations and more by manual-spatial than oral motor operations. In contrast, verbal memory performance was worse when verbal cognitive operations and oral motor operations were executed. The results are discussed in relation to the multicomponent model, the time-based resource-sharing (TBRS) model, and the Serial Order in a Box-Complex-Span (SOB-CS) model. They imply that models of working memory must incorporate mechanisms that allow for domain-specific interference in the verbal and the visuospatial domain.