Cognitive control in context: Working memory capacity and proactive control

• I examined the relationship between working memory and proactive control.
• Proactive control was varied across tasks via cue-probe conditional probabilities.
• Subjects high in working memory prepared advance responses.
• Subjects low in working memory were more influenced by overall response frequencies.

Working memory is important for maintaining critical information in an active state to guide future behavior. The executive-attention theory of working memory capacity (WMC; Engle & Kane, 2004) argues that goal maintenance is important for response selection when stimuli are associated with competing responses. Braver, Burgess, and Gray (2007) have labeled this type of preparatory activity proactive control. Previous WMC studies have not allowed individuals to use goal information to prepare a specific response in advance of the stimulus. The current experiment used different versions of a cue-probe task to examine the relationship between individual differences in WMC and proactive control. Across three versions of the AX version of the Continuous Performance Test, the proportion of targets was manipulated to affect both the predictive validity of the A cue and the prepotency of the target response to X probes. The results indicated that the high-WMC individuals used the cue information to prepare responses in advance only when a specific probe was likely to occur. In contrast, the performance of the low-WMC individuals was less dependent upon the cue and more contingent upon overall response frequencies. The results indicate that individual differences in WMC are related to proactive control and anticipation, and important for translating cognition into action.