Literature DB >> 19048447

Examining the influence of action on spatial working memory: the importance of selection.

Michael D Dodd1, Sarah Shumborski.   

Abstract

We report three experiments that examine the influence of pointing-to relative to passively viewing an array of objects that participants are attempting to memorize. Recently, Chum, Bekkering, Dodd, and Pratt (2007) provided evidence that pointing to objects enhanced memory relative to passively viewing objects when pointing instruction was manipulated within trial (e.g., point to one array but passively view the other). We replicate this result but also demonstrate that when pointing instruction is blocked (e.g., participants point to or passively view all items in an array as opposed to pointing to some while passively viewing others), pointing to an array of objects actually decreases memory relative to passively viewing that array. Moreover, when pointing is manipulated within trial, the influence of action on working-memory performance appears to be attributable to an enhancement of processing of the pointed-to items as well as a subsequent inhibition of the passively viewed array. These results demonstrate that while action can enhance working memory under conditions where a subset of items is actively selected for additional processing, when selection is not a requirement (e.g., either point to everything or passively view everything), action decreases working-memory performance. Thus, the relationship between action and spatial working memory is complex and context dependent. These results are also discussed as they relate to other similar phenomena (e.g., retrieval-induced forgetting, Corsi Blocks test) in which selection during processing may be critical, and collectively these results provide important insight into spatial working memory and the factors that influence it.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19048447     DOI: 10.1080/17470210802439869

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)        ISSN: 1747-0218            Impact factor:   2.143


  7 in total

1.  Effects of pointing on the recall of simultaneous and sequential visuospatial arrays: a role for retrieval strategies?

Authors:  Clelia Rossi-Arnaud; Pietro Spataro; Emiddia Longobardi
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-11-25

2.  Does pointing facilitate the recall of serial positions in visuospatial working memory?

Authors:  Pietro Spataro; Valeria R S Marques; Emiddia Longobardi; Clelia Rossi-Arnaud
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2015-09

3.  Movement planning and attentional control of visuospatial working memory: evidence from a grasp-to-place task.

Authors:  M A Spiegel; D Koester; T Schack
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2013-07-06

4.  Pointing movements both impair and improve visuospatial working memory depending on serial position.

Authors:  Clelia Rossi-Arnaud; Emiddia Longobardi; Pietro Spataro
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2017-08

5.  The effects of task-relevant saccadic eye movements performed during the encoding of a serial sequence on visuospatial memory performance.

Authors:  Leonardo Martin; Anthony Tapper; David A Gonzalez; Michelle Leclerc; Ewa Niechwiej-Szwedo
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  On-item fixations during serial encoding do not affect spatial working memory.

Authors:  Stefan Czoschke; Sebastian Henschke; Elke B Lange
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Effects of pointing movements on visuospatial working memory in a joint-action condition: Evidence from eye movements.

Authors:  Divya Bhatia; Vaishnavi Mohite; Pietro Spataro; Clelia Rossi-Arnaud; Ramesh Kumar Mishra
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2021-09-03
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.