Working memory (WM) is a cognitive system that allows us to select, organise, and integrate perceptual information with memories and current goal-directed intentions. As such, this system is central to day-to-day functioning and would be expected to be especially important in decision making and problem solving. We hypothesised that to the extent that individuals differ in WM capacity they would also be differentially vulnerable to the experience of depression and anxiety. Undergraduate students completed a computerised change detection task in which (...) storage capacity and filtering efficiency measures were obtained. It was found that low WM storage and poor filtering efficiency interacted to predict higher levels of emotional distress as measured by self-reported depressive symptoms, ruminative coping, and state anxiety. It was suggested that low capacity and a poor ability to ignore task-irrelevant information may lead to poorer problem solving, more extreme judgements of oneself and circumstances, increased rumination, and poorer emotional regulation. (shrink)

Previous work suggests that threat-related stimuli are stored to a greater degree in working memory compared to neutral stimuli. However, most of this research has focused on stimuli with physically salient threat attributes, failing to account for how a “neutral” stimulus that has acquired threat-related associations through differential aversive conditioning influences working memory. The current study examined how differentially conditioned safe and threat stimuli are stored in working memory relative to a novel, non-associated stimuli. Participants completed a differential fear conditioning (...) task followed by a change detection task consisting of three conditions across two loads. Results revealed individuals successfully learned to distinguishing CS+ from CS– conditions during the differential aversive conditioning task. Our working memory outcomes indicated successful load manipulation effects, but no statistically significant differences in accuracy, response time, or Pashler’s K measures of working memory capacity between CS+, CS–, or N conditions. However, we observed significantly reduced RT difference scores for the CS+ compared to CS– condition, indicating greater RT differences between the CS+ and N condition vs. the CS– and N condition. These findings suggest that differentially conditioned stimuli have little impact on behavioral outcomes of working memory compared to novel stimuli that had not been associated with previous safe of aversive outcomes, at least in healthy populations. (shrink)