Literature DB >> 24730737

Unloading and reloading working memory: attending to one item frees capacity.

Alessandra S Souza1, Laura Rerko1, Klaus Oberauer1.   

Abstract

During the retention interval of a working memory task, presenting a retro-cue directs attention to 1 of the items in working memory. Testing the cued item leads to faster and more accurate responses. We contrasted 5 explanations of this benefit: (a) removal of noncued items, (b) strengthening of the cued item, (c) protection from probe interference, (d) protection from degradation, and (e) prioritization during the decision process. Experiment 1 showed that retro-cues reduced the set size effect in a visual recognition task, and did so increasingly with more time available to use the retro-cue. This finding is predicted only by Hypotheses 1 and 2. Hypotheses 3 through 5 were ruled out as explanations of the retro-cue benefit in this experiment. In Experiments 2 and 3, participants encoded 2 sequentially presented memory sets. In half of the trials, 1 item from the first set was retro-cued during the interset interval. Retro-cues improved memory for the second set. This reloading benefit is predicted only by the removal hypothesis: Irrelevant contents are removed from working memory, freeing capacity to encode new contents. Experiment 3 also yielded evidence that strengthening of the cued item might contribute to the retro-cue effect. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24730737     DOI: 10.1037/a0036331

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  26 in total

1.  Attending to items in working memory: evidence that refreshing and memory search are closely related.

Authors:  Evie Vergauwe; Nelson Cowan
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-08

2.  The delay period as an opportunity to think about future intentions: Effects of delay length and delay task difficulty on young adult's prospective memory performance.

Authors:  Caitlin E V Mahy; Katharina Schnitzspahn; Alexandra Hering; Jacqueline Pagobo; Matthias Kliegel
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-02-02

3.  The reliability of retro-cues determines the fate of noncued visual working memory representations.

Authors:  Eren Gunseli; Dirk van Moorselaar; Martijn Meeter; Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-10

4.  Multiple modes of clearing one's mind of current thoughts: overlapping and distinct neural systems.

Authors:  Marie T Banich; Kristen L Mackiewicz Seghete; Brendan E Depue; Gregory C Burgess
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2015-01-28       Impact factor: 3.139

5.  Restoration of fMRI Decodability Does Not Imply Latent Working Memory States.

Authors:  Sebastian Schneegans; Paul M Bays
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 3.225

6.  The effect of working memory maintenance on long-term memory.

Authors:  Joshua K Hartshorne; Tal Makovski
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2019-05

7.  Retrospective Cues Mitigate Information Loss in Human Cortex during Working Memory Storage.

Authors:  Edward F Ester; Asal Nouri; Laura Rodriguez
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-08-20       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Working memory prioritization impacts neural recovery from distraction.

Authors:  Remington Mallett; Jarrod A Lewis-Peacock
Journal:  Cortex       Date:  2019-09-20       Impact factor: 4.027

9.  Mnemonic attention in analogy to perceptual attention: harmony but not uniformity.

Authors:  Sizhu Han; Yixuan Ku
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-07-09

10.  Selective Attention to Auditory Memory Neurally Enhances Perceptual Precision.

Authors:  Sung-Joo Lim; Malte Wöstmann; Jonas Obleser
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 6.167

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.