verhaeghen(vsms)

Visual search and memory search – p. 1

Preprint from the paper that appeared in

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the journal. It is not the copy of record.© Swets & Zeitlinger

VISUAL SEARCH AND MEMORY SEARCHAge differences in efficiency and effectiveness of encodingfor visual search and memory search: A time-accuracy studyPaul VerhaeghenSyracuse University

Published in

Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition

Visual search and memory search – p. 2

AbstractIn a time-accuracy study, encoding for visual search and memory search was compared in asample of 23 younger and 26 older adults. Older adults were found to be slower than younger adults in two respects (viz., processing was delayed, and speed-of-processing was lower).There was no reliable age difference in asymptotic performance when analyzed at the level of proportion correct. Age differences in speed-of-processing were larger in visual search than inmemory search. The results run counter capacity- or resource accounts of cognitive aging, butmay fit the framework that predicts larger age differences in visuo-spatial than lexical tasks(Myerson & Hale, 1993)

Visual search and memory search – p. 3

Age differences in efficiency and effectiveness of encoding for visual search and memory search: A time-accuracy studyOne of the more fascinating regularities in the field of cognitive aging is the orderly relation between latencies of older adults and those of younger adults, known since the 1980s(Cerella, 1990; Cerella, Poon, & Williams, 1980; Myerson, Hale, Wagstaff, Poon, & Smith,1990). This regularity can be captured quite well by a single highly linear function relatinglatencies of older adults to corresponding latencies of younger adults. This result has led tothe formulation of a ‘general slowing hypothesis’, that is, the hypothesis that a single ratio of processing rates of older over younger adults can describe slowing in central cognitive processes (e.g., Cerella, 1990, 1994).One challenge for current theory and research in the field is to find exceptions to this pattern. Recently, distinct age-related slowing functions have indeed emerged for differenttypes or ‘domains’ of tasks (Hale & Myerson, 1996; Kliegl, Mayr, & Krampe, 1994; Mayr,Kliegl, & Krampe, 1996; Myerson & Hale, 1993; Sliwinski & Hall, 1998). Such functionshave been termed ‘dissociations’ (Perfect & Maylor, 2000).One of the more puzzling dissociations, discovered in a meta-analysis by Sliwinskiand Hall (1998) is the dissociation between visual search and memory search. Sliwinski andHall analyzed the data at the level of full task latencies; the result has since been confirmed atthe level of processing rate (i.e., time needed to scan a single item) by Myerson, Adams,Hale, and Jenkins (2000). Slowing ratios are noticeably smaller in memory search than invisual search.This is a puzzling finding, because the bulk of cognitive aging theory would predict adissociation in the opposite direction. In memory search, participants are presented with aseries of stimuli (typically digits or letters), which is removed after a brief viewing period. Atarget is then presented and participants have to decide whether this target was present in theoriginal search set or not. In visual search, the order of affairs is reversed: here the participantis first presented with a target, and then has to decide whether this target is present or absentin a subsequent search array that remains in view throughout the search process. Memorysearch is typically considered a fixed- or limited-capacity task (Gegenfurtner & Sperling,1993; McLean, Palmer, & Loftus, 1997; Palmer, 1990; Shibuya & Bundesen, 1988; Sperling,1960), that is, stimuli are processed (at least to some degree) interdependently, and a fixed or limited amount of attentional capacity is distributed among them. Visual search (like manyother forms of perceptual processing), however, is typically considered to be less dependenton such limitations (Bennett & Jaye, 1995; Duncan, 1980; McLean, 1999; McLean, Palmer,& Loftus, 1997; Palmer 1994; Shaw, 1984; Shiffrin & Gardner, 1972). One illustration of thisdifference can be found in the slopes relating reaction time to set size, indicating how fasteach item in the search set is processed: In visual search, the slope averages about 15 ms-per-item for target-present trials (for a meta-analysis, see Wolfe, 1998); in memory search, slopeis close to 40 ms-per-item (e.g., Sternberg, 1966).If we assume that attentional capacity is restricted in older adults compared tocapacity in younger adults (see McDowd & Shaw, 2000, for a review), then the result thatadult age differences are smaller in memory search than visual search runs against the grainof aging theory, where it is typically claimed that more capacity-limited tasks yield larger deficits than tasks that are less capacity-limited (e.g., Hasher & Zacks, 1988). Moreover,many theorists (e.g., Hasher & Zacks, 1988; Kliegl, Mayr, & Krampe, 1994; Moscovitch &Winocur, 1995; Salthouse, & Babcock, 1991) have emphasized that aging is associated withspecific deficits in tasks involving an active working memory component. Thus, one might predict a larger age deficit for memory search tasks (which require a matching process within