Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T06:00:51.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Change Processes in Selective Attention during Adulthood. Inhibition or Processing Speed?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2020

Isabel Introzzi Open the ORCID record for Isabel Introzzi [Opens in a new window] ,
Eliana Zamora Open the ORCID record for Eliana Zamora [Opens in a new window] ,
Yesica Aydmune Open the ORCID record for Yesica Aydmune [Opens in a new window] ,
María Marta Richard’s Open the ORCID record for María Marta Richard’s [Opens in a new window] ,
Ana Comesaña  and
Lorena Canet-Juric Open the ORCID record for Lorena Canet-Juric [Opens in a new window]
Isabel Introzzi*
Affiliation:
Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad del Mar de Plata (Argentina)
Eliana Zamora
Affiliation:
Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad del Mar de Plata (Argentina)
Yesica Aydmune
Affiliation:
Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad del Mar de Plata (Argentina)
María Marta Richard’s
Affiliation:
Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad del Mar de Plata (Argentina)
Ana Comesaña
Affiliation:
Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad del Mar de Plata (Argentina)
Lorena Canet-Juric
Affiliation:
Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad del Mar de Plata (Argentina)
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Isabel Introzzi. Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas y de la Universidad Nacional del Mar de Plata. Mar de Plata (Argentina). E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Selective attention is involved in multiple daily activities. Several authors state that it experiences a decline after 20 years, although there is no agreement regarding the cognitive processes that explain it. Two theories dominate the discussion: The theory of inhibitory inefficiency and the theory of processing speed. At the same time, it has been suggested that there could be complementary relations between both; however, it is not clear what the contribution of inhibition and processing speed is on the changes of selective attention. Therefore, the present study proposes to analyze this contribution, in adults between 20 and 80 years old. To assess selective attention and inhibitory control, two indices of a visual search task were obtained in which participants must identify a target stimulus among a set of distracting stimuli. To evaluate the processing speed, a response speed task was used. The main results indicate that, from the age of 60, a gradual decrease in selective attention begins and that this decline can be largely explained by a decrease in processing speed and inhibitory control. We discuss about the literature on the development of selective attention, the contribution of processing speed, and the inhibitory inefficiency hypothesis.

Keywords

adultsinhibitionprocessing speedselective attention
Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 23 , 2020 , e37
Copyright
© Universidad Complutense de Madrid and Colegio Oficial de Psicólogos de Madrid 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Conflicts of Interest: None.

Funding Statement: This work was supported by the Consejo Nacional deInvestigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET).

References

Alloway, T. P., & Alloway, R. G. (2013). Working memory across the lifespan: A cross- sectional approach. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), 84–93. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2012.748027CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association (2017). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/ethics-code-2017.pdfGoogle Scholar
Asociación Médica Mundial (2013). Declaración de Helsinki. Principios éticos para las investigaciones con seres humanos [Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects]. https://www.wma.net/es/policies-post/declaracion-de-helsinki-de-la-amm-principios-eticos-para-las-investigaciones-medicas-en-seres-humanosGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Craik, F. I. M. (Eds.). (2006). Lifespan cognition: Mechanisms of change. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butman, J., Arizaga, R. L, Harris, P., Drake, M., Baumann, D., De Pascale, A., Allegri, R. F., Mangone, C. A., & Ollari, J. A. (2001). El “Mini Mental State Examination” en español. Normas para Buenos Aires [Mini Mental State Examination in Spanish. Rules for Buenos Aires]. Revista Neurológica Argentina, 26(1), 11–15.Google Scholar
Canet-Juric, L., Stelzer, F., Andrés, M. L., Vernucci, S., Introzzi, I., & Burin, D. I. (2018). Evidencias de validez de una tarea computarizada de memoria de trabajo verbal y viso-espacial para niños [Validity evidences of a set of computerized tasks called TEMT (Tasks of Evaluation of Working Memory of the TAC) for children]. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 52(1), 112–128.Google Scholar
Christie, J., & Klein, R. (1995). Familiarity and attention: Does what we know affect what we notice? Memory & Cognition, 23(5), 547–550. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197256CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Comesaña, A., Richard’s, M. M, & Vido, V. (2019). Comparative analysis of the perceptual inhibition between children and older adults. Psychology & Neuroscience, 12(1), 65–77. http://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dempster, F. N. (1992). The rise and fall of the inhibitory mechanism: Toward a unified theory of cognitive development and aging. Developmental Review, 12, 45–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(92)90003-KGoogle Scholar
Folk, C. L., & Lincourt, A. E. (1996). The effects of age on guided conjunction search. Experimental Aging Research, 22, 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/03610739608254000CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E, & McHugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for clinician. Journal of Psychiatry Research, 12, 189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geary, D. C., Boykin, A. W., Embretson, S., Reyna, V., Siegler, R., Berch, D. B., & Graban, J. (2008). Report of the task group on learning processes. In U.S. Department of Education (Ed.), The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. https://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/learning-processes.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hasher, L., Lustig, C., & Zacks, R. (2007). Inhibitory mechanisms and the control of attention. In Conway, A., Jarrold, C., Kane, M., Miyake, A., & Towse, J. (Eds.), Variation in Working Memory (pp. 227–249). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195168648.003.0009Google Scholar
Hommel, B., Li, K. Z. H., & Li, S.-C. (2004). Visual search across the life span. Developmental Psychology, 40(4), 545–558. http://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.40.4.545CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Introzzi, I., Andrés, M. L., Canet-Juric, L., Stelzer, F., & Richard’s, M. M. (2016). The relationship between the rumination style and perceptual, cognitive, and behavioral inhibition. Psychology & Neuroscience, 9(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000068CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kail, R., & Bisanz, J. (1992). The information-processing perspective on cognitive development in childhood and adolescence. In Sternberg, R. J. & Berg, C. A. (Eds.), Intellectual development. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kail, R., & Salthouse, T. A. (1994). Processing speed as a mental capacity. Acta Psychologica, 86, 199–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(94)90003-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein, R. M., Christie, J. J., & Ivanoff, J. (2004, November). Graphical and other methods for representing the speed and accuracy of performance [Poster presentation]. XLV annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society. Minneapolis, MN.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madden, D. J. (2007). Aging and visual attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(2), 70–74. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00478.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAvinue, L. P., Habekost, T., Johnson, K. A., Kyllingsbæk, S., Vangkilde, S., Bundesen, C., & Robertson, I.H. (2012). Sustained attention, attentional selectivity, and attentional capacity across the lifespan. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 74(8), 1570–1582. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-012-0352-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mesulam, M. M. (2002). The human frontal lobes: Transcending the default mode through contingent encoding. In Stuss, D. T. & Knight, R. T. (Eds.), Principles of frontal lobe function (pp. 8–30). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195134971.003.0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mullane, J. C., Corkum, P. V., Klein, R. M., & McLaughlin, E. (2009). Interference control in children with and without ADHD: A systematic review of Flanker and Simon task performance. Child Neuropsychology, 15(4), 321–342. https://doi.org/10.1080/09297040802348028CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nigg, J. T. (2017). Annual Research Review: On the relations among self-regulation, self-control, executive functioning, effortful control, cognitive control, impulsivity, risk-taking, and inhibition for developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 58(4), 361–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12675CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ortega, A., Gómez-Ariza, C. J., Román, P., & Bajo, M. T. (2012). Memory inhibition, aging, and the executive deficit hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(1), 178–186. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0024510Google ScholarPubMed
Rabbitt, P. (2017). Speed of visual search in old age: 1950 to 2016. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Psychological Sciences, 72(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw097CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richard’s, M. M., Introzzi, I., Zamora, E., & Vernucci, S. (2017). Analysis of internal and external validity criteria for a computerized visual search task. A pilot study. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 6(2), 110–119. http://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2015.1083433CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T. A. (1993). Speed mediation of adult age differences in cognition. Developmental Psychology, 29(4), 722–738. http://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.29.4.722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salthouse, T. A. (2017). Shared and unique influences on age-related cognitive change. Neuropsychology, 31(1), 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000330CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T. A., & Kail, R. (1983). Memory development throughout the lifespan: The role of processing rate. In Babes, P. B. & Brin, O. G. (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior, Vol. 5 (pp. 89–l16). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schmeichel, B. J., & Baumeister, R. F. (2010). Effortful attention control. Bruya, En B. (Ed.), Effortless attention: A new perspective in the cognitive science of attention and action (pp. 29–50). MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8602.003.0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scialfa, C. T., & Joffe, K. M. (1997). Age differences in feature and conjunction search: Implications for theories of visual search and generalized slowing. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 4, 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825589708256649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solesio-Jofre, E., Lorenzo-López, L., Gutiérrez, R., López-Frutos, J. M., Ruiz-Vargas, J. M., & Maestú, F. (2011). Age effects on retroactive interference during working memory maintenance. Biological Psychology, 88(1), 72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.06.011CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solesio-Jofre, E., Lorenzo-López, L., Gutiérrez, R., López-Frutos, J. M., Ruiz-Vargas, J. M., & Maestú, F. (2012). Age-related effects in working memory recognition modulated by retroactive interference. The Journals of Gerontology. Series A, Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 67(6), 565–572. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/glr199CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Theeuwes, J., Atchley, P., & Kramer, A. F. (2000). On the time course of top-down and bottom-up control of visual attention. In Monsell, S. & Driver, J. (Eds.), Attention & performance XVIII (pp. 105–124). MIT Press.Google Scholar
Townsend, J. T., & Ashby, F. G. (1983). Stochastic modeling of elementary psychological processes. New York: Cambridge University Press. https://trove.nla.gov.au/version/45672902Google Scholar
Treisman, A. M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12(1), 97–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trick, L. M., & Enns, J. T. (1998). Life span changes in attention: The visual search task. Cognitive Development, 13, 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2014(98)90016-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zacks, J. L., & Zacks, R. T. (1993). Visual search times assessed without reaction times: A new method and an application to aging. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 798–813. http://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.19.4.798Google Scholar