Does the experimenter presence impact children’s working memory?

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL
Valérie Camos , Stéphanie Mariz Elsig , Yagmur Öncü , Marion Wohlhauser , Clément Belletier
{"title":"Does the experimenter presence impact children’s working memory?","authors":"Valérie Camos ,&nbsp;Stéphanie Mariz Elsig ,&nbsp;Yagmur Öncü ,&nbsp;Marion Wohlhauser ,&nbsp;Clément Belletier","doi":"10.1016/j.cogdev.2025.101569","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The literature on audience effect shows that the presence of even a single person is enough to undermine performance in tasks relying on executive functions. This detrimental effect would result from the automatic capture of attention. Despite evidence in adults, investigations are still lacking in children. Here, we tested for the first time whether the common situation in psychology research to have an experimenter present at testing may impact children’s working memory (WM). According to the attentional capture hypothesis, and in line with adults’ findings, an experimenter presence effect should be observed when children use attention for WM maintenance, that is after the age of 7, and younger children should be immune to this effect. The experimenter presence was manipulated in a complex span task in which children memorised names of pictures or letters while naming colours of smileys aloud. Across three experiments, we varied the age of our participants (5, 8 and 11), the memory test (recognition and serial recall), and the difficulty of the secondary task by changing the speed of the presentation of the smileys. Despite these variations, results were congruent across experiments. As expected, the presence of an experimenter did not affect performance in 5-year-olds. However, contrary to the predictions based on attentional capture hypothesis, performance in older children was similar across conditions, with evidence in favour of the absence of interaction between age and presence condition, despite the expected better performance in older compared to younger children. These results departed from what was observed in adults and have implications for understanding the audience effect.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51422,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Development","volume":"74 ","pages":"Article 101569"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Development","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885201425000280","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The literature on audience effect shows that the presence of even a single person is enough to undermine performance in tasks relying on executive functions. This detrimental effect would result from the automatic capture of attention. Despite evidence in adults, investigations are still lacking in children. Here, we tested for the first time whether the common situation in psychology research to have an experimenter present at testing may impact children’s working memory (WM). According to the attentional capture hypothesis, and in line with adults’ findings, an experimenter presence effect should be observed when children use attention for WM maintenance, that is after the age of 7, and younger children should be immune to this effect. The experimenter presence was manipulated in a complex span task in which children memorised names of pictures or letters while naming colours of smileys aloud. Across three experiments, we varied the age of our participants (5, 8 and 11), the memory test (recognition and serial recall), and the difficulty of the secondary task by changing the speed of the presentation of the smileys. Despite these variations, results were congruent across experiments. As expected, the presence of an experimenter did not affect performance in 5-year-olds. However, contrary to the predictions based on attentional capture hypothesis, performance in older children was similar across conditions, with evidence in favour of the absence of interaction between age and presence condition, despite the expected better performance in older compared to younger children. These results departed from what was observed in adults and have implications for understanding the audience effect.
实验者在场是否影响儿童的工作记忆?
关于听众效应的文献表明,在依赖执行功能的任务中,即使只有一个人在场,也足以破坏表现。这种有害的影响是由注意力的自动捕获造成的。尽管在成人中有证据,但在儿童中仍缺乏调查。本研究首次测试了心理学研究中有实验者在场的常见情况是否会影响儿童的工作记忆(WM)。根据注意捕获假说,并与成人的研究结果一致,当儿童在7岁以后使用注意力来维持WM时,应该观察到实验者在场效应,而更小的儿童应该对这种效应免疫。在一个复杂的跨度任务中,实验者的存在被操纵,在这个任务中,孩子们一边背诵图片或字母的名字,一边大声说出笑脸符号的颜色。在三个实验中,我们改变了参与者的年龄(5岁、8岁和11岁)、记忆测试(识别和连续回忆),以及通过改变微笑符号呈现的速度来改变次要任务的难度。尽管存在这些差异,但实验结果是一致的。正如预期的那样,实验者的存在并不影响5岁儿童的表现。然而,与基于注意力捕获假说的预测相反,年龄较大的儿童在不同条件下的表现是相似的,有证据表明年龄和存在条件之间没有相互作用,尽管预期年龄较大的儿童比年幼的儿童表现更好。这些结果与在成人中观察到的结果不同,对理解观众效应具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.60%
发文量
114
期刊介绍: Cognitive Development contains the very best empirical and theoretical work on the development of perception, memory, language, concepts, thinking, problem solving, metacognition, and social cognition. Criteria for acceptance of articles will be: significance of the work to issues of current interest, substance of the argument, and clarity of expression. For purposes of publication in Cognitive Development, moral and social development will be considered part of cognitive development when they are related to the development of knowledge or thought processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信