Literature DB >> 22307648

Retinotopic memory is more precise than spatiotopic memory.

Julie D Golomb1, Nancy Kanwisher.   

Abstract

Successful visually guided behavior requires information about spatiotopic (i.e., world-centered) locations, but how accurately is this information actually derived from initial retinotopic (i.e., eye-centered) visual input? We conducted a spatial working memory task in which subjects remembered a cued location in spatiotopic or retinotopic coordinates while making guided eye movements during the memory delay. Surprisingly, after a saccade, subjects were significantly more accurate and precise at reporting retinotopic locations than spatiotopic locations. This difference grew with each eye movement, such that spatiotopic memory continued to deteriorate, whereas retinotopic memory did not accumulate error. The loss in spatiotopic fidelity is therefore not a generic consequence of eye movements, but a direct result of converting visual information from native retinotopic coordinates. Thus, despite our conscious experience of an effortlessly stable spatiotopic world and our lifetime of practice with spatiotopic tasks, memory is actually more reliable in raw retinotopic coordinates than in ecologically relevant spatiotopic coordinates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22307648      PMCID: PMC3277191          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1113168109

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  42 in total

1.  Interactions between gaze-centered and allocentric representations of reach target location in the presence of spatial updating.

Authors:  Patrick A Byrne; David C Cappadocia; J Douglas Crawford
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2010-09-15       Impact factor: 1.886

2.  Interaction between gaze and visual and proprioceptive position judgements.

Authors:  Katja Fiehler; Frank Rösler; Denise Y P Henriques
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Rapid formation of spatiotopic representations as revealed by inhibition of return.

Authors:  Yoni Pertzov; Ehud Zohary; Galia Avidan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-06-30       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Location and identity memory of saccade targets.

Authors:  I-Fan Lin; Andrei Gorea
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2010-11-27       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Predictive remapping of attention across eye movements.

Authors:  Martin Rolfs; Donatas Jonikaitis; Heiner Deubel; Patrick Cavanagh
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2010-12-26       Impact factor: 24.884

6.  Psychophysical evidence for spatiotopic processing in area MT in a short-term memory for motion task.

Authors:  Wei Song Ong; Nina Hooshvar; Mingsha Zhang; James W Bisley
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2009-08-19       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 7.  Cortical mechanisms for trans-saccadic memory and integration of multiple object features.

Authors:  Steven L Prime; Michael Vesia; J Douglas Crawford
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2011-02-27       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  Attentional facilitation throughout human visual cortex lingers in retinotopic coordinates after eye movements.

Authors:  Julie D Golomb; Alyssa Y Nguyen-Phuc; James A Mazer; Gregory McCarthy; Marvin M Chun
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2010-08-04       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Attention doesn't slide: spatiotopic updating after eye movements instantiates a new, discrete attentional locus.

Authors:  Julie D Golomb; Alexandria C Marino; Marvin M Chun; James A Mazer
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 2.199

10.  The native coordinate system of spatial attention is retinotopic.

Authors:  Julie D Golomb; Marvin M Chun; James A Mazer
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2008-10-15       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  17 in total

1.  Multisensory self-motion compensation during object trajectory judgments.

Authors:  Kalpana Dokka; Paul R MacNeilage; Gregory C DeAngelis; Dora E Angelaki
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2013-09-22       Impact factor: 5.357

2.  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

3.  Object-location binding across a saccade: A retinotopic spatial congruency bias.

Authors:  Anna Shafer-Skelton; Colin N Kupitz; Julie D Golomb
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Attentional load interferes with target localization across saccades.

Authors:  W Joseph MacInnes; Amelia R Hunt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 5.  Remapping locations and features across saccades: a dual-spotlight theory of attentional updating.

Authors:  Julie D Golomb
Journal:  Curr Opin Psychol       Date:  2019-04-04

6.  Peri-saccadic natural vision.

Authors:  Michael Dorr; Peter J Bex
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 6.167

7.  Memory for retinotopic locations is more accurate than memory for spatiotopic locations, even for visually guided reaching.

Authors:  Anna Shafer-Skelton; Julie D Golomb
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-08

8.  Feature-binding errors after eye movements and shifts of attention.

Authors:  Julie D Golomb; Zara E L'heureux; Nancy Kanwisher
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2014-03-19

Review 9.  Visual Remapping.

Authors:  Julie D Golomb; James A Mazer
Journal:  Annu Rev Vis Sci       Date:  2021-07-09       Impact factor: 7.745

10.  Forgetting what was where: the fragility of object-location binding.

Authors:  Yoni Pertzov; Mia Yuan Dong; Muy-Cheng Peich; Masud Husain
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-10-31       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.