Literature DB >> 26335303

Priorities for representation: Task settings and object interaction both influence object memory.

Clare Kirtley1, Benjamin W Tatler2.   

Abstract

Following an active task, the memory representations for used and unused objects are different. However, it is not clear whether these differences arise due to prioritizing objects that are task-relevant, objects that are physically interacted with, or a combination of the two factors. The present study allowed us to tease apart the relative importance of task-relevance and physical manipulation on object memory. A paradigm was designed in which objects were either necessary to complete a task (target), moved out of the way (obstructing, but interacted with), or simply present in the environment (background). Participants' eye movements were recorded with a portable tracker during the task, and they received a memory test on the objects after the task was completed. Results showed that manipulating an object is sufficient to change how information is extracted and retained from fixations, compared to background objects. Task-relevance provides an additional influence: information is accumulated and retained differently for manipulated target objects than manipulated obstructing objects. These findings demonstrate that object memory is influenced both by whether we physically interact with an object, and the relevance of that object to our behavioral goals.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Action; Intention; Memory; Perception; Real-world

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26335303     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-015-0550-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  18 in total

1.  Visual memory and motor planning in a natural task.

Authors:  Mary M Hayhoe; Anurag Shrivastava; Ryan Mruczek; Jeff B Pelz
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.240

2.  Hand-eye coordination during sequential tasks.

Authors:  D H Ballard; M M Hayhoe; F Li; S D Whitehead
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1992-09-29       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Vision-for-action: the effects of object property discrimination and action state on affordance compatibility effects.

Authors:  Steven P Tipper; Matthew A Paul; Amy E Hayes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2006-06

4.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal.

Authors:  Dale J Barr; Roger Levy; Christoph Scheepers; Harry J Tily
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  The Psychophysics Toolbox.

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

6.  The influence of instructions on object memory in a real-world setting.

Authors:  Benjamin W Tatler; Sarah L Tatler
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2013-02-06       Impact factor: 2.240

7.  What you see is what you need.

Authors:  Jochen Triesch; Dana H Ballard; Mary M Hayhoe; Brian T Sullivan
Journal:  J Vis       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.240

8.  When does repeated search in scenes involve memory? Looking at versus looking for objects in scenes.

Authors:  Melissa L-H Võ; Jeremy M Wolfe
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2011-06-20       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Interacting with objects compresses environmental representations in spatial memory.

Authors:  Laura E Thomas; Christopher C Davoli; James R Brockmole
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2013-02

10.  Task specificity and the influence of memory on visual search: comment on Võ and Wolfe (2012).

Authors:  Andrew Hollingworth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.332

View more
  1 in total

1.  Facilitation of allocentric coding by virtue of object-semantics.

Authors:  Harun Karimpur; Yaniv Morgenstern; Katja Fiehler
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-04-18       Impact factor: 4.379

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.