Older adults encode more, not less: evidence for age-related attentional broadening

Some young adults hyper-bind too: Attentional control relates to individual differences in hyper-binding

Hyper-binding - the erroneous encoding of target and distractor information into associative pairs in memory - has been described as a unique age effect caused by declines in attentional control. Previous work has found that, on average, young adults do not hyper-bind. However, if hyper-binding is caused by reduced attentional control, then young adults with poor attention regulation should also show evidence of hyper-binding. We tested this question with an individual differences approach, using a battery of attentional control tasks and relating this to individual differences in hyper-binding. Participants (N = 121) completed an implicit associative memory test measuring memory for both target-distractor (i.e., hyper-binding) and target-target pairs, followed by a series of tasks measuring attentional control. Our results show that on average, young adults do not hyper-bind, but as predicted, those with poor attentional control show a larger hyper-binding effect than those with good attentional control. Exploratory analyses also suggest that individual differences in attentional control relate to susceptibility to interference at retrieval. These results support the hypothesis that hyper-binding in older adults is due to age-related declines in attentional control, and demonstrate that hyper-binding may be an issue for any individual with poor attentional control, regardless of age.

Are older adults susceptible to visual distraction when targets and distractors are spatially separated?

Older adults show preserved memory for previously distracting information due to reduced inhibitory control. In some previous studies, targets and distractors overlap both temporally and spatially. We investigated whether age differences in attentional orienting and disengagement affect recognition memory when targets and distractors are spatially separated at encoding. In Experiments 1 and 2, eye movements were recorded while participants completed an incidental encoding task under covert (i.e., restricted viewing) and overt (i.e., free-viewing) conditions, respectively. The encoding task consisted of pairs of target and distractor item-color stimuli presented in separate visual hemifields. Prior to stimulus onset, a central cue indicated the location of the upcoming target. Participants were subsequently tested on their recognition of the items, their location, and the associated color. In Experiment 3, targets were validly cued on 75% of the encoding trials; on invalid trials, participants had to disengage their attention from the distractor and reorient to the target. Associative memory for colors was reduced among older adults across all experiments, though their location memory was only reduced in Experiment 1. In Experiment 2, older and younger adults directed a similar proportion of fixations toward targets and distractors. Explicit recognition of distractors did not differ between age groups in any of the experiments. However, older adults were slower to correctly recognize distractors than false alarm to novel items in Experiment 2, suggesting some implicit memory for distraction. Together, these results demonstrate that older adults may only be vulnerable to encoding visual distraction when viewing behavior is unconstrained.

For Whom (and When) the Time Bell Tolls: Chronotypes and the Synchrony Effect

Circadian rhythms are powerful timekeepers that drive physiological and intellectual functioning throughout the day. These rhythms vary across individuals, with morning chronotypes rising and peaking early in the day and evening chronotypes showing a later rise in arousal, with peaks in the afternoon or evening. Chronotype also varies with age from childhood to adolescence to old age. As a result of these differences, the time of day at which people are best at attending, learning, solving analytical problems, making complex decisions, and even behaving ethically varies. Across studies of attention and memory and a range of allied areas, including academic achievement, judgment and decision-making, and neuropsychological assessment, optimal outcomes are found when performance times align with peaks in circadian arousal, a finding known as the synchrony effect. The benefits of performing in synchrony with one's chronotype (and the costs of not doing so) are most robust for individuals with strong morning or evening chronotypes and for tasks that require effortful, analytical processing or the suppression of distracting information. Failure to take the synchrony effect into consideration may be a factor in issues ranging from replication difficulties to school timing to assessing intellectual disabilities and apparent cognitive decline in aging.

Predictability-Based Source Segregation and Sensory Deviance Detection in Auditory Aging

When multiple sound sources are present at the same time, auditory perception is often challenged with disentangling the resulting mixture and focusing attention on the target source. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that background (distractor) sound sources are easier to ignore when their spectrotemporal signature is predictable. Prior evidence suggests that this ability to exploit predictability for foreground-background segregation degrades with age. On a theoretical level, this has been related with an impairment in elderly adults’ capabilities to detect certain types of sensory deviance in unattended sound sequences. Yet the link between those two capacities, deviance detection and predictability-based sound source segregation, has not been empirically demonstrated. Here we report on a combined behavioral-EEG study investigating the ability of elderly listeners (60–75 years of age) to use predictability as a cue for sound source segregation, as well as their sensory deviance detection capacities. Listeners performed a detection task on a target stream that can only be solved when a concurrent distractor stream is successfully ignored. We contrast two conditions whose distractor streams differ in their predictability. The ability to benefit from predictability was operationalized as performance difference between the two conditions. Results show that elderly listeners can use predictability for sound source segregation at group level, yet with a high degree of inter-individual variation in this ability. In a further, passive-listening control condition, we measured correlates of deviance detection in the event-related brain potential (ERP) elicited by occasional deviations from the same spectrotemporal pattern as used for the predictable distractor sequence during the behavioral task. ERP results confirmed neural signatures of deviance detection in terms of mismatch negativity (MMN) at group level. Correlation analyses at single-subject level provide no evidence for the hypothesis that deviance detection ability (measured by MMN amplitude) is related to the ability to benefit from predictability for sound source segregation. These results are discussed in the frameworks of sensory deviance detection and predictive coding.

Older Adults Encode Task-Irrelevant Stimuli, but Can This Side-Effect be Useful to Them?

We studied whether, due to deteriorating inhibitory functions, older people are more likely to process irrelevant stimuli; and if so, could they later use this information better than young adults. In the study phase of our experiment, a Posner-type gaze-cued version of a Simon task was performed in which we presented task-irrelevant cues, where faces or patches with either left- or right-looking dots for the pupil of the eye preceded the task to press a button congruent or incongruent with the presentation side of the target stimulus. In the follow-up test phase, participants completed an unexpected facial recognition test. In the study phase not only a decreased P1, but also an increased N170 amplitude of the event-related potentials (ERPs) were found in older, compared to younger adults, and also for faces compared to patches. Even though in the test phase both age-groups could recognize the faces better than statistically by chance, neither the older nor the younger participants could discriminate them effectively. The late positive component (LPC)—the ERP correlates of the old/new effect, being the higher amplitude for the earlier presented stimuli when compared with the unseen stimuli during the recognition test—was not evolved in the older group, while a reversed old/new effect was seen in younger participants: higher amplitude was found in New-Right and Old-Wrong conditions (for faces they did not recognize independent of seeing them before) compared to Old-Right and New-Wrong conditions (for faces they thought they recognized from the study phase). In conclusion, although older adults showed enhanced processing of task-irrelevant stimuli compared to younger adults, as indicated by the N170 amplitude, however, they were not able to utilize this information in a later task, as was suggested by the recognition rate and LPC amplitude results.

Age differences in cross-task bleeding

The present study investigated age-related differences in the ability to constrain attention to the current task, without contamination (bleeding) from an upcoming decision. Each experiment included two blocks of trials. During Block 1, participants initially incidentally encoded a list of high- and low-frequency words, after which they pronounced aloud the studied words intermixed with a new set of words during a test phase. Block 2 was identical to Block 1 with the exception that after pronouncing each word aloud, participants made an additional decision (episodic recognition decision in Experiments 1 and 2 and animacy decision in Experiment 3). In the first two experiments, older adults showed disproportionate slowing in their response times to pronounce the words when they additionally had to make a recognition judgment afterward (Block 2) compared to when they only pronounced the words aloud (Block 1). Importantly, the difference between high-frequency and low-frequency words (the word frequency effect) was disproportionately attenuated for older adults in Block 2 compared to Block 1 and compared to younger adults. These results suggest that older adults experience greater cross-task bleeding than younger adults because word frequency has opposing effects in pronunciation and recognition tasks. As predicted, this age modulation of the word frequency effect in pronunciation performance was not replicated in Experiment 3 when participants made an animacy judgment, wherein word frequency effects act in concert with those of the pronunciation task. Discussion focuses on age-related differences in the ability to constrain attention to a current task. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Individual differences in selective attention and scanning dynamics influence children's learning from relevant non-targets in a visual search task

Efficient selective attention is critical for engaging in task-oriented behavior but may also limit our processing of potentially meaningful, task-irrelevant details. Both older adults and younger children demonstrate poor selective attention skills but show increased processing of task-irrelevant information. This broader attention to non-targets can benefit learning among older adults when the non-target information is relevant to a primary learning goal. Although young children show similar patterns of attention to non-targets, it is unknown whether relevant non-targets similarly benefit their learning. This study examined the relationship between 4- to 8-year-old children's selective attention skills and their learning from incidental exposure to relevant non-targets. In Experiment 1, children completed an incidental encoding phase, followed by a visual search task and then a final recognition memory task. During the search task, participants identified a target within arrays containing 0, 5, 10, or 15 non-targets. Half of the images from the encoding phase appeared in the search as "relevant" non-targets, whereas the remainder never appeared during the search task. Participants showed better memory for images presented as relevant non-targets. However, children showed the largest memory benefit when efficient selective attention allowed for increased scanning of the relevant non-targets after target detection. Experiment 2 confirmed that children showed similarly efficient selective attention skills but no longer showed enhanced learning when they could not scan relevant non-targets following target detection. These results suggest that children's incidental learning from relevant non-targets is an active process that depends on how children use selective attention to engage in effective information gathering.