Table 1.
Effect sizes (r) for the effect of working memory (WM) load (unless stated otherwise) on distractor processing (reaction time effects, unless stated otherwise).
| Source | Experiment | Effect size (r) | Effect of working memory load on |
|---|---|---|---|
| De Fockert et al. (2001) | 0.773 | Interference from distractor faces | |
| Berti and Schröger (2003) | −0.644 | Distraction by auditory deviant | |
| Lavie et al. (2004) | 1 | 0.604 | Interference from distractor letters (flanker interference) |
| Lavie et al. (2004) | 2 | 0.514 | Flanker interference with articulatory suppression |
| Lavie et al. (2004) | 3 | 0.667 | Flanker interference under low, high perceptual load |
| Lavie et al. (2004) | 4 | 0.752 | Flanker interference (single vs. dual task with high load) |
| Lavie et al. (2004) | 5 | 0.836 | Flanker interference (single vs. dual task with low load) |
| Stins et al. (2004) | 1 | 0.369 | Stroop interference (spatial WM task) |
| Stins et al. (2004) | 2 | −0.440 | Simon congruence effect (spatial WM task) |
| Boot et al. (2005) | 1 | 0.410 | Attentional capture by onset singletons |
| Boot et al. (2005) | 2 | 0.414 | Attentional capture by color singletons |
| Lavie and De Fockert (2005) | 1 | 0.653 | Attentional capture by color singletons |
| Lavie and De Fockert (2005) | 2 | 0.642 | Attentional capture by color singletons |
| Kim et al. (2005) | 1a | 0.658 | Stroop interference (verbal WM condition, target load) |
| Kim et al. (2005) | 2a | −0.638 | Stroop interference (verbal WM condition, distractor load) |
| Kim et al. (2005) | 3a | 0.660 | L/R congruency (verbal WM condition, target load) |
| Kim et al. (2005) | 3b | −0.548 | L/R congruency (verbal WM condition, distractor load) |
| Park et al. (2007) | 1 | 0.335 | Interference on same/different judgments (target load) |
| Park et al. (2007) | 1 | −0.299 | Interference on same/different judgments (distractor load) |
| Park et al. (2007) | 2 | 0.464 | Interference on same/different judgments (target load) |
| Park et al. (2007) | 2 | −0.483 | Interference on same/different judgments (distractor load) |
| Chen and Chan (2007) | 3 | 0.052 | Flanker interference (narrow focus condition) |
| Pecchinenda and Heil (2007) | 1 | 0.447 | Interference from distractor faces |
| Pecchinenda and Heil (2007) | 2 | 0.426 | Interference from distractor faces |
| Pecchinenda and Heil (2007) | 3 | -0.062 | Interference from emotional distractor faces |
| SanMiguel et al. (2008) | −0.703 | Distraction by auditory deviant | |
| Macdonald and Lavie (2008) | 6 | 0.336 | Detection of expected stimulus during letter search |
| Dalton et al. (2009a) | 0.443 | Interference from auditory distractors | |
| Dalton et al. (2009b) | 1 | 0.505 | Interference from tactile distractors (accuracy rates) |
| Dalton et al. (2009b) | 2 | 0.455 | Interference from tactile distractors (accuracy rates) |
| De Fockert and Wu (2009) | 0.660 | Ebbinghaus illusion | |
| Kelley and Lavie (2011) | 0.360 | Interference from distractor objects | |
| de Liaño et al. (2010) | 1 | −0.421 | Stroop interference (distractor load) (inverse efficiency scores) |
| De Fockert et al. (2010) | 2 | 0.453 | Flanker interference (prime display) |
| Jongen and Jonkman (2011) | 0.013 | Interference from distractor faces | |
| Legrain et al. (2011) | −0.768 | Capture by painful (vs. non-painful) tactile distractors | |
| Pratt et al. (2011) | 0.567 | Interference from distractor arrows (accuracy rates) | |
| De Fockert and Bremner (2011) | 1 | 0.483 | Target detection in inattentional blindness |
| De Fockert and Bremner (2011) | 2 | 0.421 | Target detection in inattentional blindness |
| De Fockert and Theeuwes (2012) | -0.465 | Attentional capture by color singletons | |
| Carmel et al. (2012) | 1 | 0.225 | Distractor face identification |
| Carmel et al. (2012) | 2 | 0.327 | Distractor face identification |
| Carmel et al. (2012) | 3 | 0.096 | Distractor house identification |
| Ahmed and De Fockert (2012a) | 1 | 0.613 | Navon interference from global level |
| Ahmed and De Fockert (2012a) | 2 | −0.620 | Navon interference from local level |
| Ahmed and De Fockert (2012a) | 3 | 0.291 | Navon interference from global level |
| Ahmed and De Fockert (2012a) | 3 | −0.261 | Navon interference from local level |
| Ahmed and De Fockert (2012b) | 1 | 0.763 | Flanker interference (High WM capacity) |
| Ahmed and De Fockert (2012b) | 1 | −0.422 | Flanker interference (Low WM capacity) |
Positive effect sizes represent cases where distractor processing was greater under high (vs. low) working memory load. Negative effect sizes represent cases where distractor processing was greater under low (vs. high) working memory load. Effect sizes in bold are statistically significant effects at p < 0.05. Papers included in the meta-analysis were first identified via PubMed (search terms “working memory selective attention”). The search returned 750 articles, from which relevant papers were selected, i.e., when they measured distractor processing in selective attention whilst manipulating working memory load. In addition, any relevant work was included that was cited in the selected papers, but had not been identified in the PubMed search.