Literature DB >> 24395020

Similarity-based distortion of visual short-term memory is due to perceptual averaging.

Chad Dubé1, Feng Zhou2, Michael J Kahana3, Robert Sekuler4.   

Abstract

A task-irrelevant stimulus can distort recall from visual short-term memory (VSTM). Specifically, reproduction of a task-relevant memory item is biased in the direction of the irrelevant memory item (Huang & Sekuler, 2010a). The present study addresses the hypothesis that such effects reflect the influence of neural averaging under conditions of uncertainty about the contents of VSTM (Alvarez, 2011; Ball & Sekuler, 1980). We manipulated subjects' attention to relevant and irrelevant study items whose similarity relationships were held constant, while varying how similar the study items were to a subsequent recognition probe. On each trial, subjects were shown one or two Gabor patches, followed by the probe; their task was to indicate whether the probe matched one of the study items. A brief cue told subjects which Gabor, first or second, would serve as that trial's target item. Critically, this cue appeared either before, between, or after the study items. A distributional analysis of the resulting mnemometric functions showed an inflation in probability density in the region spanning the spatial frequency of the average of the two memory items. This effect, due to an elevation in false alarms to probes matching the perceptual average, was diminished when cues were presented before both study items. These results suggest that (a) perceptual averages are computed obligatorily and (b) perceptual averages are relied upon to a greater extent when item representations are weakened. Implications of these results for theories of VSTM are discussed.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Distributional analysis; Perceptual averaging; Recognition memory; Selective attention; Visual short-term memory

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24395020      PMCID: PMC4013795          DOI: 10.1016/j.visres.2013.12.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vision Res        ISSN: 0042-6989            Impact factor:   1.886


  36 in total

1.  What are the units of visual short-term memory, objects or spatial locations?

Authors:  D Lee; M M Chun
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2001-02

2.  Attentional spread in the statistical processing of visual displays.

Authors:  Sang Chul Chong; Anne Treisman
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2005-01

3.  Dividing attention across feature dimensions in statistical processing of perceptual groups.

Authors:  Tatiana Aloi Emmanouil; Anne Treisman
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2008-08

4.  Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs.

Authors:  G R Loftus; M E Masson
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1994-12

5.  Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory.

Authors:  Weiwei Zhang; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-04-02       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

Authors:  D H Brainard
Journal:  Spat Vis       Date:  1997

7.  The number and quality of representations in working memory.

Authors:  Weiwei Zhang; Steven J Luck
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-10-10

8.  Distortions in recall from visual memory: two classes of attractors at work.

Authors:  Jie Huang; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2010-02-24       Impact factor: 2.240

9.  Homogeneity computation: how interitem similarity in visual short-term memory alters recognition.

Authors:  Shivakumar Viswanathan; Daniel R Perl; Kristina M Visscher; Michael J Kahana; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-02

10.  Dynamic shifts of limited working memory resources in human vision.

Authors:  Paul M Bays; Masud Husain
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-08-08       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  13 in total

1.  Memory and learning with rapid audiovisual sequences.

Authors:  Arielle S Keller; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Flexible Coding of Visual Working Memory Representations during Distraction.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Lorenc; Kartik K Sreenivasan; Derek E Nee; Annelinde R E Vandenbroucke; Mark D'Esposito
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Ensemble coding of memory strength in recognition tests.

Authors:  Chad Dubé; Ke Tong; Holly Westfall; Emily Bauer
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-07

4.  Central tendency representation and exemplar matching in visual short-term memory.

Authors:  Chad Dubé
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-05

5.  An adaptive perspective on visual working memory distortions.

Authors:  Chaipat Chunharas; Rosanne L Rademaker; Timothy F Brady; John T Serences
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2022-02-21

6.  Neural interactions in working memory explain decreased recall precision and similarity-based feature repulsion.

Authors:  Jeffrey S Johnson; Amanda E van Lamsweerde; Evelina Dineva; John P Spencer
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-10-22       Impact factor: 4.996

7.  Attention-modulated alpha-band oscillations protect against intrusion of irrelevant information.

Authors:  Lisa Payne; Sylvia Guillory; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Distraction biases working memory for faces.

Authors:  Remington Mallett; Anurima Mummaneni; Jarrod A Lewis-Peacock
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2020-04

9.  Visual recency bias is explained by a mixture model of internal representations.

Authors:  Kristjan Kalm; Dennis Norris
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 2.240

10.  Supraliminal but not subliminal distracters bias working memory recall.

Authors:  Theresa Wildegger; Nicholas E Myers; Glyn Humphreys; Anna C Nobre
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 3.332

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.