» Articles » PMID: 31721792

Reorganization of Spatial Configurations in Visual Working Memory: A Matter of Set Size?

Overview
Journal PLoS One
Date 2019 Nov 14
PMID 31721792
Citations 1
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Humans process single objects in relation to other simultaneously maintained objects in visual working memory. This interdependence is called spatial configuration. Humans are able to reorganize global spatial configurations into relevant partial configurations. We conducted three experiments investigating the process underlying reorganization by manipulating memory set size and the presence of configurations at retrieval. Participants performed a location change detection task for a single object probed at retrieval. At the beginning of each trial, participants memorized the locations of all objects (set size: 4, 8, 12, or 16). During maintenance, a valid retro cue highlighted the side containing the object probed at retrieval, thus enabling participants to reorganize the memorized global spatial configuration to the partial cued configuration. At retrieval, the object probed was shown together with either all objects (complete configuration; Experiment 1a), the cued objects only (congruent configuration; all Experiments), the non-cued objects only (incongruent configuration, all Experiments) or alone (no configuration; Experiment 1b). We observed reorganization of spatial configurations as indicated by a superior location change detection performance with a congruent partial configuration than an incongruent partial configuration across all three experiments. We also observed an overall decrease in accuracy with increasing set size. Most importantly, however, we did not find evidence for a reliable impairment of reorganization with increasing set size. We discuss these findings with regard to the memory representation underlying spatial configurations.

Citing Articles

Processing spatial configurations in visuospatial working memory is influenced by shifts of overt visual attention.

Timm J, Papenmeier F PLoS One. 2023; 18(2):e0281445.

PMID: 36758044 PMC: 9910631. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281445.

References
1.
Papenmeier F, Huff M, Schwan S . Representation of dynamic spatial configurations in visual short-term memory. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011; 74(2):397-415. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-011-0242-3. View

2.
Peirce J, Gray J, Simpson S, Macaskill M, Hochenberger R, Sogo H . PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behav Res Methods. 2019; 51(1):195-203. PMC: 6420413. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y. View

3.
Ogmen H, Ekiz O, Huynh D, Bedell H, Tripathy S . Bottlenecks of motion processing during a visual glance: the leaky flask model. PLoS One. 2014; 8(12):e83671. PMC: 3877086. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083671. View

4.
Matsukura M, Hollingworth A . Does visual short-term memory have a high-capacity stage?. Psychon Bull Rev. 2011; 18(6):1098-104. PMC: 3248760. DOI: 10.3758/s13423-011-0153-2. View

5.
Brady T, Alvarez G . Contextual effects in visual working memory reveal hierarchically structured memory representations. J Vis. 2015; 15(15):6. DOI: 10.1167/15.15.6. View