Literature DB >> 33415712

Effect of attentional selection on working memory for depth in a retro-cueing paradigm.

Zhuolun Li1, Mengxuan Tong1, Shiting Chen1, Jiehui Qian2.   

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that the temporary storage and manipulation of depth information (working memory for depth; WMd) is largely different from that of visual information in a 2D context (visual working memory; VWM). Although there has been abundant evidence on VWM showing that cueing a memory item during retention could bias attention to its internal representation and thus improves its memory performance (a retro-cue effect), it is unknown whether such an effect differs for WMd that is nested in a 3D context compared with that in a conventional 2D context. Here, we used a change detection task to investigate the effect of attentional selection on WMd by testing several types of retro-cue. The memory array consisted of items positioned at various stereoscopic depth planes, and a cue was presented during retention. Participants needed to make judgments on whether the depth position of target (one memory item) had changed. Our study showed reliable valid retro-cue benefits but no invalid retro-cue cost, indicating that the relational information may be registered in WMd to prevent a strategical removal of the unattended item. There was also a slight improvement in memory performance for cueing depth order compared with that for cueing other feature dimensions or 2D locations. The attentional effect on memory representation in a 3D context is different from that in a 2D context, and the divergence may suggest the distinctive nature of working memory for depth.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Attention; Retro-cue effect; Stereoscopic depth; Working memory

Year:  2021        PMID: 33415712     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-020-01123-4

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


  6 in total

Review 1.  Different states in visual working memory: when it guides attention and when it does not.

Authors:  Christian N L Olivers; Judith Peters; Roos Houtkamp; Pieter R Roelfsema
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  2011-06-12       Impact factor: 20.229

2.  Attention modulates maintenance of representations in visual short-term memory.

Authors:  Bo-Cheng Kuo; Mark G Stokes; Anna Christina Nobre
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 3.225

3.  Focused, unfocused, and defocused information in working memory.

Authors:  Laura Rerko; Klaus Oberauer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 3.051

4.  When shorter delays lead to worse memories: Task disruption makes visual working memory temporarily vulnerable to test interference.

Authors:  Benchi Wang; Jan Theeuwes; Christian N L Olivers
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2017-11-02       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  The range and scope of binocular depth discrimination in man.

Authors:  C Blakemore
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1970-12       Impact factor: 5.182

6.  The effects of sequential attention shifts within visual working memory.

Authors:  Qi Li; Jun Saiki
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2014-09-04
  6 in total
  2 in total

1.  Common Neural Mechanisms Control Attention and Working Memory.

Authors:  Ying Zhou; Clayton E Curtis; Kartik K Sreenivasan; Daryl Fougnie
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-08-04       Impact factor: 6.709

Review 2.  The Short-Term Retention of Depth.

Authors:  Adam Reeves; Jiehui Qian
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-08
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.