Dimension-based Retro-cue Benefit in Working Memory Does Not Require Unfocused Dimension Removal

Overview

Journal Front Psychol

Date 2024 Nov 18

PMID 39554712

Authors

Ruyi Liu

Lijing Guo

Xiaoshu Lin

Dan Nie

Piia Astikainen

Chaoxiong Ye

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: Within the maintenance phase of visual working memory (VWM), previous researchers presented retro-cues orienting to a probed dimension across all multidimension stimuli and found a robust dimension-based retro-cue benefit (RCB): VWM performance for cued dimension was better than no/neutral-cue baseline. This improvement is often attributed to the prioritization of information related to the focused dimension and the removal of information related to the unfocused dimension from VWM. However, it remains unclear whether the removal of the uncued dimension is necessary to observe this dimension-based RCB.

Methods: In the current study, we first manipulated the number of retro-cues to investigate this question. We used colored, oriented bars as stimuli and two sequential retro-cues oriented to different dimensions in the double-cue condition. The last presented cue in each trial was always valid. Therefore, the unfocused dimension in the first cue display was probed in double-cue trials. Experiment 1 adopted change detection tasks and three cue type conditions (no-cue, single-cue, double-cue). Experiment 2 divided the single-cue condition into early- and late- cue conditions, using recall tasks to elevated probe precision. Experiment 3 further added double-neutral and double-same cue types and eliminated the different influences of post-memory masks on each dimension respectively.

Results: Results across these experiments showed a robust pattern of no worse performances for the double-cue condition than for the single-cue condition.

Discussion: Because the dimension-based single cue benefit was observed especially in early-cue trials, we supposed that the dimension-based RCB does not require removing the unfocused dimension from VWM.

References

LaRocque J, Lewis-Peacock J, Postle B . Multiple neural states of representation in short-term memory? It's a matter of attention. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014; 8:5. PMC: 3899521. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00005. View

Rerko L, Souza A, Oberauer K . Retro-cue benefits in working memory without sustained focal attention. Mem Cognit. 2014; 42(5):712-28. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-013-0392-8. View

Hao R, Becker M, Ye C, Liu Q, Liu T . The bandwidth of VWM consolidation varies with the stimulus feature: Evidence from event-related potentials. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2017; 44(5):767-777. PMC: 5934301. DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000488. View

Hajonides J, van Ede F, Stokes M, Nobre A . Comparing the prioritization of items and feature-dimensions in visual working memory. J Vis. 2020; 20(8):25. PMC: 7453048. DOI: 10.1167/jov.20.8.25. View

Bays P, Catalao R, Husain M . The precision of visual working memory is set by allocation of a shared resource. J Vis. 2009; 9(10):7.1-11. PMC: 3118422. DOI: 10.1167/9.10.7. View

Luck S, Vogel E . Visual working memory capacity: from psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends Cogn Sci. 2013; 17(8):391-400. PMC: 3729738. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.06.006. View

Chen S, Kocsis A, Liesefeld H, Muller H, Conci M . Object-based grouping benefits without integrated feature representations in visual working memory. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2020; 83(3):1357-1374. PMC: 8049898. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-020-02153-5. View

Bacon W, Egeth H . Overriding stimulus-driven attentional capture. Percept Psychophys. 1994; 55(5):485-96. DOI: 10.3758/bf03205306. View

Fukuda K, Vogel E . Visual short-term memory capacity predicts the "bandwidth" of visual long-term memory encoding. Mem Cognit. 2019; 47(8):1481-1497. PMC: 6823324. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-019-00954-0. View

10.

Liu X, Liu R, Guo L, Astikainen P, Ye C . Encoding specificity instead of online integration of real-world spatial regularities for objects in working memory. J Vis. 2022; 22(9):8. PMC: 9437652. DOI: 10.1167/jov.22.9.8. View

11.

Rerko L, Oberauer K . Focused, unfocused, and defocused information in working memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2013; 39(4):1075-96. DOI: 10.1037/a0031172. View

12.

Ye C, Guo L, Wang N, Liu Q, Xie W . Perceptual encoding benefit of visual memorability on visual memory formation. Cognition. 2024; 248:105810. PMC: 11369960. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105810. View

13.

Markov Y, Tiurina N, Utochkin I . Different features are stored independently in visual working memory but mediated by object-based representations. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2019; 197:52-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2019.05.003. View

14.

Xie W, Zhang W . Familiarity speeds up visual short-term memory consolidation. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2017; 43(6):1207-1221. DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000355. View

15.

Zhang Z, Lewis-Peacock J . Bend but don't break: Prioritization protects working memory from displacement but leaves it vulnerable to distortion from distraction. Cognition. 2023; 239:105574. PMC: 11122694. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105574. View

16.

Ye C, Hu Z, Li H, Ristaniemi T, Liu Q, Liu T . A two-phase model of resource allocation in visual working memory. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2017; 43(10):1557-1566. PMC: 5581736. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000376. View

17.

Kong G, Fougnie D . Visual search within working memory. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2019; 148(10):1688-1700. DOI: 10.1037/xge0000555. View

18.

Schurgin M, Wixted J, Brady T . Psychophysical scaling reveals a unified theory of visual memory strength. Nat Hum Behav. 2020; 4(11):1156-1172. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-020-00938-0. View

19.

Hakim N, Feldmann-Wustefeld T, Awh E, Vogel E . Perturbing Neural Representations of Working Memory with Task-irrelevant Interruption. J Cogn Neurosci. 2019; 32(3):558-569. PMC: 7310497. DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_01481. View

20.

Ye C, Liang T, Zhang Y, Xu Q, Zhu Y, Liu Q . The two-stage process in visual working memory consolidation. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):13564. PMC: 7419308. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-70418-y. View