Cargando…

Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs

Most recent models conceptualize working memory (WM) as a continuous resource, divided up according to task demands. When an increasing number of items need to be remembered, each item receives a smaller chunk of the memory resource. These models predict that the allocation of attention to high-prio...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Myers, Nicholas E., Chekroud, Sammi R., Stokes, Mark G., Nobre, Anna C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Psychological Association 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5868459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28816476
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000449
_version_ 1783309142773989376
author Myers, Nicholas E.
Chekroud, Sammi R.
Stokes, Mark G.
Nobre, Anna C.
author_facet Myers, Nicholas E.
Chekroud, Sammi R.
Stokes, Mark G.
Nobre, Anna C.
author_sort Myers, Nicholas E.
collection PubMed
description Most recent models conceptualize working memory (WM) as a continuous resource, divided up according to task demands. When an increasing number of items need to be remembered, each item receives a smaller chunk of the memory resource. These models predict that the allocation of attention to high-priority WM items during the retention interval should be a zero-sum game: improvements in remembering cued items come at the expense of uncued items because resources are dynamically transferred from uncued to cued representations. The current study provides empirical data challenging this model. Four precision retrocueing WM experiments assessed cued and uncued items on every trial. This permitted a test for trade-off of the memory resource. We found no evidence for trade-offs in memory across trials. Moreover, robust improvements in WM performance for cued items came at little or no cost to uncued items that were probed afterward, thereby increasing the net capacity of WM relative to neutral cueing conditions. An alternative mechanism of prioritization proposes that cued items are transferred into a privileged state within a response-gating bottleneck, in which an item uniquely controls upcoming behavior. We found evidence consistent with this alternative. When an uncued item was probed first, report of its orientation was biased away from the cued orientation to be subsequently reported. We interpret this bias as competition for behavioral control in the output-driving bottleneck. Other items in WM did not bias each other, making this result difficult to explain with a shared resource model.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5868459
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher American Psychological Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58684592018-03-28 Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs Myers, Nicholas E. Chekroud, Sammi R. Stokes, Mark G. Nobre, Anna C. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform Research Reports Most recent models conceptualize working memory (WM) as a continuous resource, divided up according to task demands. When an increasing number of items need to be remembered, each item receives a smaller chunk of the memory resource. These models predict that the allocation of attention to high-priority WM items during the retention interval should be a zero-sum game: improvements in remembering cued items come at the expense of uncued items because resources are dynamically transferred from uncued to cued representations. The current study provides empirical data challenging this model. Four precision retrocueing WM experiments assessed cued and uncued items on every trial. This permitted a test for trade-off of the memory resource. We found no evidence for trade-offs in memory across trials. Moreover, robust improvements in WM performance for cued items came at little or no cost to uncued items that were probed afterward, thereby increasing the net capacity of WM relative to neutral cueing conditions. An alternative mechanism of prioritization proposes that cued items are transferred into a privileged state within a response-gating bottleneck, in which an item uniquely controls upcoming behavior. We found evidence consistent with this alternative. When an uncued item was probed first, report of its orientation was biased away from the cued orientation to be subsequently reported. We interpret this bias as competition for behavioral control in the output-driving bottleneck. Other items in WM did not bias each other, making this result difficult to explain with a shared resource model. American Psychological Association 2017-08-17 2018-03 /pmc/articles/PMC5868459/ /pubmed/28816476 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000449 Text en © 2017 The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This article has been published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Copyright for this article is retained by the author(s). Author(s) grant(s) the American Psychological Association the exclusive right to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.
spellingShingle Research Reports
Myers, Nicholas E.
Chekroud, Sammi R.
Stokes, Mark G.
Nobre, Anna C.
Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs
title Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs
title_full Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs
title_fullStr Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs
title_full_unstemmed Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs
title_short Benefits of Flexible Prioritization in Working Memory Can Arise Without Costs
title_sort benefits of flexible prioritization in working memory can arise without costs
topic Research Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5868459/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28816476
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000449
work_keys_str_mv AT myersnicholase benefitsofflexibleprioritizationinworkingmemorycanarisewithoutcosts
AT chekroudsammir benefitsofflexibleprioritizationinworkingmemorycanarisewithoutcosts
AT stokesmarkg benefitsofflexibleprioritizationinworkingmemorycanarisewithoutcosts
AT nobreannac benefitsofflexibleprioritizationinworkingmemorycanarisewithoutcosts