Citation

Adam KCS, Vogel EK. Atten. Percept. Psychophys. 2017; 79(5): 1506-1523.

Affiliation

Institute for Mind & Biology, University of Chicago, 940 E. 57th St, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.3758/s13414-017-1331-8

PMID

28470554

Abstract

Working memory performance fluctuates dramatically from trial to trial. On many trials, performance is no better than chance. Here, we assessed participants' awareness of working memory failures. We used a whole-report visual working memory task to quantify both trial-by-trial performance and trial-by-trial subjective ratings of inattention to the task. In Experiment 1 (N = 41), participants were probed for task-unrelated thoughts immediately following 20% of trials. In Experiment 2 (N = 30), participants gave a rating of their attentional state following 25% of trials. Finally, in Experiments 3a (N = 44) and 3b (N = 34), participants reported confidence of every response using a simple mouse-click judgment. Attention-state ratings and off-task thoughts predicted the number of items correctly identified on each trial, replicating previous findings that subjective measures of attention state predict working memory performance. However, participants correctly identified failures on only around 28% of failure trials. Across experiments, participants' metacognitive judgments reliably predicted variation in working memory performance but consistently and severely underestimated the extent of failures. Further, individual differences in metacognitive accuracy correlated with overall working memory performance, suggesting that metacognitive monitoring may be key to working memory success.

Language: en

Keywords

Attentional control; Metacognition; Visual working memory