What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.

<h4>Background</h4>Not only is compulsive checking the most common symptom in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) with an estimated prevalence of 50-80% in patients, but approximately ∼15% of the general population reveal subclinical checking tendencies that impact negatively on their pe...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Ben Harkin, Sebastien Miellet, Klaus Kessler
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2012
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/5ad13b87a9c44ea1bba0da1f9a5f34c4
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:5ad13b87a9c44ea1bba0da1f9a5f34c4
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:5ad13b87a9c44ea1bba0da1f9a5f34c42021-11-18T08:14:15ZWhat checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.1932-620310.1371/journal.pone.0044689https://doaj.org/article/5ad13b87a9c44ea1bba0da1f9a5f34c42012-01-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/23049755/?tool=EBIhttps://doaj.org/toc/1932-6203<h4>Background</h4>Not only is compulsive checking the most common symptom in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) with an estimated prevalence of 50-80% in patients, but approximately ∼15% of the general population reveal subclinical checking tendencies that impact negatively on their performance in daily activities. Therefore, it is critical to understand how checking affects attention and memory in clinical as well as subclinical checkers. Eye fixations are commonly used as indicators for the distribution of attention but research in OCD has revealed mixed results at best.<h4>Methodology/principal finding</h4>Here we report atypical eye movement patterns in subclinical checkers during an ecologically valid working memory (WM) manipulation. Our key manipulation was to present an intermediate probe during the delay period of the memory task, explicitly asking for the location of a letter, which, however, had not been part of the encoding set (i.e., misleading participants). Using eye movement measures we now provide evidence that high checkers' inhibitory impairments for misleading information results in them checking the contents of WM in an atypical manner. Checkers fixate more often and for longer when misleading information is presented than non-checkers. Specifically, checkers spend more time checking stimulus locations as well as locations that had actually been empty during encoding.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>We conclude that these atypical eye movement patterns directly reflect internal checking of memory contents and we discuss the implications of our findings for the interpretation of behavioural and neuropsychological data. In addition our results highlight the importance of ecologically valid methodology for revealing the impact of detrimental attention and memory checking on eye movement patterns.Ben HarkinSebastien MielletKlaus KesslerPublic Library of Science (PLoS)articleMedicineRScienceQENPLoS ONE, Vol 7, Iss 9, p e44689 (2012)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Ben Harkin Sebastien Miellet Klaus Kessler What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
description	<h4>Background</h4>Not only is compulsive checking the most common symptom in Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD) with an estimated prevalence of 50-80% in patients, but approximately ∼15% of the general population reveal subclinical checking tendencies that impact negatively on their performance in daily activities. Therefore, it is critical to understand how checking affects attention and memory in clinical as well as subclinical checkers. Eye fixations are commonly used as indicators for the distribution of attention but research in OCD has revealed mixed results at best.<h4>Methodology/principal finding</h4>Here we report atypical eye movement patterns in subclinical checkers during an ecologically valid working memory (WM) manipulation. Our key manipulation was to present an intermediate probe during the delay period of the memory task, explicitly asking for the location of a letter, which, however, had not been part of the encoding set (i.e., misleading participants). Using eye movement measures we now provide evidence that high checkers' inhibitory impairments for misleading information results in them checking the contents of WM in an atypical manner. Checkers fixate more often and for longer when misleading information is presented than non-checkers. Specifically, checkers spend more time checking stimulus locations as well as locations that had actually been empty during encoding.<h4>Conclusions/significance</h4>We conclude that these atypical eye movement patterns directly reflect internal checking of memory contents and we discuss the implications of our findings for the interpretation of behavioural and neuropsychological data. In addition our results highlight the importance of ecologically valid methodology for revealing the impact of detrimental attention and memory checking on eye movement patterns.
format	article
author	Ben Harkin Sebastien Miellet Klaus Kessler
author_facet	Ben Harkin Sebastien Miellet Klaus Kessler
author_sort	Ben Harkin
title	What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
title_short	What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
title_full	What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
title_fullStr	What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
title_full_unstemmed	What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
title_sort	what checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.
publisher	Public Library of Science (PLoS)
publishDate	2012
url	https://doaj.org/article/5ad13b87a9c44ea1bba0da1f9a5f34c4
work_keys_str_mv	AT benharkin whatcheckersactuallycheckaneyetrackingstudyofinhibitorycontrolandworkingmemory AT sebastienmiellet whatcheckersactuallycheckaneyetrackingstudyofinhibitorycontrolandworkingmemory AT klauskessler whatcheckersactuallycheckaneyetrackingstudyofinhibitorycontrolandworkingmemory
_version_	1718422044304998400

What checkers actually check: an eye tracking study of inhibitory control and working memory.

Ejemplares similares