Literature DB >> 23918552

Reconciling conflicting electrophysiological findings on the guidance of attention by working memory.

Nancy B Carlisle1, Geoffrey F Woodman.   

Abstract

Maintaining a representation in working memory has been proposed to be sufficient for the execution of top-down attentional control. Two recent electrophysiological studies that recorded event-related potentials (ERPs) during similar paradigms have tested this proposal, but have reported contradictory findings. The goal of the present study was to reconcile these previous reports. To this end, we used the stimuli from one study (Kumar, Soto, & Humphreys, 2009) combined with the task manipulations from the other (Carlisle & Woodman, 2011b). We found that when an item matching a working memory representation was presented in a visual search array, we could use ERPs to quantify the size of the covert attention effect. When the working memory matches were consistently task-irrelevant, we observed a weak attentional bias to these items. However, when the same item indicated the location of the search target, we found that the covert attention effect was approximately four times larger. This shows that simply maintaining a representation in working memory is not equivalent to having a top-down attentional set for that item. Our findings indicate that high-level goals mediate the relationship between the contents of working memory and perceptual attention.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23918552      PMCID: PMC3800228          DOI: 10.3758/s13414-013-0529-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys        ISSN: 1943-3921            Impact factor:   2.199


  27 in total

1.  Electrophysiological measurement of rapid shifts of attention during visual search.

Authors:  G F Woodman; S J Luck
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-08-26       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Serial deployment of attention during visual search.

Authors:  Geoffrey F Woodman; Steven J Luck
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.332

3.  A theory of visual attention.

Authors:  C Bundesen
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Guided search: an alternative to the feature integration model for visual search.

Authors:  J M Wolfe; K R Cave; S L Franzel
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1989-08       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Early, involuntary top-down guidance of attention from working memory.

Authors:  David Soto; Dietmar Heinke; Glyn W Humphreys; Manuel J Blanco
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 3.332

6.  The effect of items in working memory on the deployment of attention and the eyes during visual search.

Authors:  R Houtkamp; P R Roelfsema
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Visual search and stimulus similarity.

Authors:  J Duncan; G W Humphreys
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 8.  Neural mechanisms of selective visual attention.

Authors:  R Desimone; J Duncan
Journal:  Annu Rev Neurosci       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 12.449

9.  Templates for rejection: configuring attention to ignore task-irrelevant features.

Authors:  Jason T Arita; Nancy B Carlisle; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-04-02       Impact factor: 3.332

10.  Working memory can guide pop-out search.

Authors:  David Soto; Glyn W Humphreys; Dietmar Heinke
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2005-10-27       Impact factor: 1.886

View more
  10 in total

1.  How visual working memory contents influence priming of visual attention.

Authors:  Nancy B Carlisle; Árni Kristjánsson
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-04-12

2.  Working memory contents enhance perception under stimulus-driven competition.

Authors:  Suk Won Han
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-04

3.  Using a model of hypothesis generation to predict eye movements in a visual search task.

Authors:  Daniel R Buttaccio; Nicholas D Lange; Rick P Thomas; Michael R Dougherty
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2015-02

4.  Attentional Prioritization of Complex, Naturalistic Stimuli Maintained in Working-Memory-A Dot-Probe Event-Related Potentials Study.

Authors:  Natalia Rutkowska; Łucja Doradzińska; Michał Bola
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2022-04-29       Impact factor: 3.473

5.  Quantifying the Attentional Impact of Working Memory Matching Targets and Distractors.

Authors:  Nancy B Carlisle; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  Vis cogn       Date:  2019-06-27

6.  What not to look for: Electrophysiological evidence that searchers prefer positive templates.

Authors:  Jason Rajsic; Nancy B Carlisle; Geoffrey F Woodman
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 3.054

Review 7.  Flexibility in Attentional Control: Multiple Sources and Suppression.

Authors:  Nancy B Carlisle
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2019-03-25

8.  Working memory guidance of visual attention to threat in offenders.

Authors:  Tamara S Satmarean; Elizabeth Milne; Richard Rowe
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Object-based Encoding in Visual Working Memory: Evidence from Memory-driven Attentional Capture.

Authors:  Zaifeng Gao; Shixian Yu; Chengfeng Zhu; Rende Shui; Xuchu Weng; Peng Li; Mowei Shen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Working memory is corrupted by strategic changes in search templates.

Authors:  Garry Kong; Jessica Meehan; Daryl Fougnie
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2020-08-03       Impact factor: 2.240

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.