Kane, M.J., Bleckley, M.K., Conway, A.R.A., & Engle, R.W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169-183. The authors examined whether individual differences in working-memory (WM) capacity are related to attentional control. In Experiment I, high- and low-WM-span participants performed equally well in a prosaccade task, but low-span participants were slower and less accurate in an antisaccade task, indicating differences in attentional control. Experiment II measured eye movements during a long antisaccade session, with low-span participants making slower and more erroneous saccades than high-span participants. Both experiments showed that low-span participants performed poorly when switching tasks from antisaccade to prosaccade. These findings support a controlled-attention view of WM capacity. The study discusses the relationship between working-memory capacity and higher-order cognition, highlighting that WM capacity reflects a general controlled-attention capability. This view is supported by findings that WM span tasks correlate with complex cognition measures, as they reflect the level of skill in the processing task. Alternative views suggest that WM capacity is more general, but the study's findings support the controlled-attention view. The authors tested 133 participants on three WM span tests with reading, arithmetic, and counting as concurrent tasks. They found that varied WM tests reflected a common factor separate from, but strongly related to, traditional STM tasks. The study also found that the residual of WM was strongly correlated with general fluid intelligence (gF), supporting the controlled-attention view of WM capacity. The study also examined individual differences in WM capacity through a visual-orienting task, the antisaccade task. High-span participants outperformed low-span participants in this task, indicating better attentional control. The findings suggest that WM capacity is related to controlled attention, with higher WM individuals demonstrating better use of attention to resist interference during encoding and retrieval. The study's results support the controlled-attention view of WM capacity, showing that individual differences in WM capacity are related to attentional control. High-span participants performed better in tasks requiring controlled attention, such as the antisaccade task, while low-span participants performed poorly. These findings highlight the importance of controlled attention in WM capacity and its role in higher-order cognition.Kane, M.J., Bleckley, M.K., Conway, A.R.A., & Engle, R.W. (2001). A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 169-183. The authors examined whether individual differences in working-memory (WM) capacity are related to attentional control. In Experiment I, high- and low-WM-span participants performed equally well in a prosaccade task, but low-span participants were slower and less accurate in an antisaccade task, indicating differences in attentional control. Experiment II measured eye movements during a long antisaccade session, with low-span participants making slower and more erroneous saccades than high-span participants. Both experiments showed that low-span participants performed poorly when switching tasks from antisaccade to prosaccade. These findings support a controlled-attention view of WM capacity. The study discusses the relationship between working-memory capacity and higher-order cognition, highlighting that WM capacity reflects a general controlled-attention capability. This view is supported by findings that WM span tasks correlate with complex cognition measures, as they reflect the level of skill in the processing task. Alternative views suggest that WM capacity is more general, but the study's findings support the controlled-attention view. The authors tested 133 participants on three WM span tests with reading, arithmetic, and counting as concurrent tasks. They found that varied WM tests reflected a common factor separate from, but strongly related to, traditional STM tasks. The study also found that the residual of WM was strongly correlated with general fluid intelligence (gF), supporting the controlled-attention view of WM capacity. The study also examined individual differences in WM capacity through a visual-orienting task, the antisaccade task. High-span participants outperformed low-span participants in this task, indicating better attentional control. The findings suggest that WM capacity is related to controlled attention, with higher WM individuals demonstrating better use of attention to resist interference during encoding and retrieval. The study's results support the controlled-attention view of WM capacity, showing that individual differences in WM capacity are related to attentional control. High-span participants performed better in tasks requiring controlled attention, such as the antisaccade task, while low-span participants performed poorly. These findings highlight the importance of controlled attention in WM capacity and its role in higher-order cognition.