Literature DB >> 26706291

Response-time evidence for mixed memory states in a sequential-presentation change-detection task.

Robert M Nosofsky1, Chris Donkin2.   

Abstract

Response-time (RT) and choice-probability data were obtained in a rapid visual sequential-presentation change-detection task in which memory set size, study-test lag, and objective change probabilities were manipulated. False "change" judgments increased dramatically with increasing lag, consistent with the idea that study items with long lags were ejected from a discrete-slots buffer. Error RTs were nearly invariant with set size and lag, consistent with the idea that the errors were produced by a stimulus-independent guessing process. The patterns of error and RT data could not be explained in terms of encoding limitations, but were consistent with the hypothesis that long retention lags produced a zero-stimulus-information state that required guessing. Formal modeling of the change-detection RT and error data pointed toward a hybrid model of visual working memory. The hybrid model assumed mixed states involving a combination of memory and guessing, but with higher memory resolution for items with shorter retention lags. The work raises new questions concerning the nature of the memory representations that are produced across the closely related tasks of change detection and visual memory search.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Change detection; Memory search; Response-time models; Visual memory

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26706291     DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2015.11.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Psychol        ISSN: 0010-0285            Impact factor:   3.468


  4 in total

1.  Set size effects on working memory precision are not due to an averaging of slots.

Authors:  Michael S Pratte
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Clear evidence for item limits in visual working memory.

Authors:  Kirsten C S Adam; Edward K Vogel; Edward Awh
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Accounting for stimulus-specific variation in precision reveals a discrete capacity limit in visual working memory.

Authors:  Michael S Pratte; Young Eun Park; Rosanne L Rademaker; Frank Tong
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.332

4.  Perceptual stimuli with novel bindings interfere with visual working memory.

Authors:  Peter Shepherdson
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2021-09-03       Impact factor: 2.199

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.