{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017693315858453473, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002621231979030144, 'mean_word_length': 5.786666666666667, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Working memory capacity preferentially enhances implementation of proactive control.

Previous research has linked working memory capacity (WMC) with enhanced proactive control. However, it remains unclear the extent to which this relationship reflects the influence of WMC on the tendency to engage proactive control, or rather, the ability to implement it. The current study sought to clarify this ambiguity by leveraging the Dual Mechanisms of Cognitive Control (DMCC) version of the AX-CPT task, in which the mode of cognitive control is experimentally manipulated across distinct testing sessions. To adjudicate between competing hypotheses, Bayesian mixed modeling was used to conduct sequential analyses involving two separate data sets. Posterior parameter estimates obtained from the initial analysis were entered as informed priors during the replication analysis to evaluate the influence of new data on previous estimates. Results yielded strong evidence demonstrating that the influence of WMC on proactive control is most robust under experimentally controlled conditions, during which use of proactive control is standardized across participants via explicit training and instruction. Critically, the observed pattern of findings suggests that the relationship between WMC and proactive control may be better characterized as individual differences in the ability to implement proactive control, rather than a more generalized tendency to engage it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).