E Stuyven

Verifying simple arithmetic sums and products: Are the phonological loop and the central executive involved?

In two experiments, we investigated the role of the phonological loop and the central executive in the verification of the complete set of one-digit addition (Experiment 1) and multiplication (Experiment 2) problems. The focus of the present study was on the contradictory results concerning the contribution of the phonological loop in the verification of true problems (e.g., 8+4=12 or 4×6=24) reported until now. The results revealed that this slave system is not involved in verifying simple arithmetic problems, in contrast to the central executive. Furthermore, our results indicated that the split effect is due to the use of two different arithmetic strategies.

The effect of cognitive load on saccadic eye movements

The present study tested the hypothesis that, unlike prosaccades, antisaccades require controlled processing, due to the prepotent response that needs to be inhibited. The effect of the Random time Interval Generation (RIG) task (Vandierendonck, A., De Vooght, G., & Van der Goten, K. (1998). European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 10, 413-444) on these saccade latencies and errors was studied. This task has the advantage that it loads executive processes, with only minimal interference with verbal or visuo-spatial components. A first experiment compared saccade performance within the prosaccade and the antisaccade task, executed alone and in combination with the RIG task and fixed tapping (added to exclude possible motor component interference explanations). A second experiment investigated the influence of task characteristics on the effects found. Although it was shown that antisaccades are more prone to interference of an executive interference task, it seems that prosaccades are also vulnerable. Interference on prosaccades could originate from a controlled execution of these saccades. A third experiment confirmed that endogenously generated prosaccades are susceptible to dual-task interference and showed that controlled saccade execution, without the need to inhibit a prepotent response, is sufficient to produce interference.

Parallel visual and memory processes

We studied parallel processes: visual processes with the prosaccade, the no-saccade and the antisaccade task on the one hand and memory processes with the random tap task on the other hand. The random tap task is believed to be a pure interference task for the central executive component of working memory. The number of saccadic errors was found not to be influenced by taxing the central executive, while the latency times were significantly increased both in the prosaccade and in the antisaccade task. The effect seen in the antisaccade task was expected since it is a non-automatic activity under central executive control. Because the prosaccade task is an automatic activity, an effect of central executive load was not expected. As an explanation for our findings, we postulate that the prosaccade task is brought under willed control of the central executive.