↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the Working Memory Load in N-Back and Working Memory Span Tasks by Means of EEG Frequency Band Power and P300 Amplitude

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
116 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
287 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparison of the Working Memory Load in N-Back and Working Memory Span Tasks by Means of EEG Frequency Band Power and P300 Amplitude
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00006
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christian Scharinger, Alexander Soutschek, Torsten Schubert, Peter Gerjets

Abstract

According to theoretical accounts, both, N-back and complex span tasks mainly require working memory (WM) processing. In contrast, simple span tasks conceptually mainly require WM storage. Thus, conceptually, an N-back task and a complex span task share more commonalities as compared to a simple span task. In the current study, we compared an N-back task, a complex operation span task (Ospan), and a simple digit span task (Dspan) by means of typical WM load-related measures of the Electroencephalogram (EEG) like the parietal alpha and beta frequency band power, the frontal theta frequency band power, and the P300 amplitude, to examine whether these tasks would show commonalities or differences in WM processing-load. We expected that increasing WM-load would generally lead to a decreased alpha and beta frequency band power, an increased theta frequency band power, and a decreased P300 amplitude. Yet, based on the conceptual considerations, we hypothesized that the outcomes of these measures would be more comparable between the N-back and the Ospan as compared to the Dspan. Our hypotheses were partly confirmed. The N-back and the Ospan showed timely more prolonged alpha frequency band power effects as compared to the Dspan. This might indicate higher demands on WM processing in the former two tasks. The theta frequency band power and the P300 amplitude were most pronounced in the N-back task as compared to both span tasks. This might indicate specific demands on cognitive control in the N-back task. Additionally, we observed that behavioral performance measures correlated with changes in EEG alpha power of the N-back and the Ospan, yet not of the Dspan. Taken together, the hypothesized conceptual commonalities between the N-back task and the Ospan (and, for the Dspan, differences) were only partly confirmed by the electrophysiological WM load-related measures, indicating a potential need for reconsidering the theoretical accounts on WM tasks and the value of a closer link to electrophysiological research herein.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 287 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 284 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 58 20%
Student > Master 54 19%
Student > Bachelor 25 9%
Researcher 25 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 6%
Other 33 11%
Unknown 76 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 67 23%
Neuroscience 64 22%
Engineering 19 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 2%
Other 26 9%
Unknown 95 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 January 2017.
All research outputs
#18,504,575
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,084
of 7,177 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#309,498
of 418,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#154
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,177 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 176 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.