Limits on perceptual encoding can be predicted from known receptive field properties of human visual cortex.

Cohen, Michael A.; Rhee, Juliana; Alvarez, George A.

doi:10.1037/xhp0000108

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the notion that imprecision can emerge from systematic inter-item dependencies is somewhat at odds with the basic resource limitation model, it is consistent with the recent proposal of a specific form of resource limitation in which the constrained resource is the representational space itself (M. A. Cohen, Rhee, & Alvarez, 2016;Franconeri, Alvarez, & Cavanagh, 2013;Oberauer & Lin, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Chunking as a rational strategy for lossy data compression in visual working memory

Nassar

Helmers

Frank

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1 2The nature of capacity limits for visual working memory has been the 3 subject of an intense debate that has relied on models that assume items are 4 encoded independently. Here we propose that instead, similar features are jointly 5 encoded through a "chunking" process to optimize performance on visual working 6 memory tasks. We show that such chunking can: 1) facilitate performance 7 improvements for abstract capacity-limited systems, 2) be optimized through 8 reinforcement, 3) be implemented by center-surround dynamics, and 4) increase 9effective storage capacity at the expense of recall precision. Human performance 10 on a variant of a canonical working memory task demonstrated performance 11 advantages, precision detriments, inter-item dependencies, and trial-to-trial 12 behavioral adjustments diagnostic of performance optimization through center-13 surround chunking. Models incorporating center-surround chunking provided a 14 better quantitative description of human performance in our study as well as in a 15 meta-analytic dataset, and apparent differences in working memory capacity 16 across individuals were attributable to individual differences in the 17 implementation of chunking. Our results reveal a normative rationale for center-18 surround connectivity in working memory circuitry, call for re-evaluation of 19 memory performance differences that have previously been attributed to 20 differences in capacity, and support a more nuanced view of visual working 21 memory capacity limitations: strategic tradeoff between storage capacity and 22 memory precision through chunking contribute to flexible capacity limitations that 23 include both discrete and continuous aspects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Chunking as a rational strategy for lossy data compression in visual working memory

Nassar

Helmers

Frank

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sixteen placeholders were position around the fixation point (3.5º from fixation, 0.6º in diameter, white rim with thickness of 0.02º). The location of the memory targets were selected at random except that they were always presented in the same hemifield to maximize inter-item competitions (47)(48)(49).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive memory distortion in visual working memory

Chunharas¹,

Rademaker²,

Brady³

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When holding many things in mind, the memory of each item often becomes more similar (attraction) or more different (repulsion). There is no existing framework that explains these distortions, and here we propose and show that these opposite systematic biases reflect different behavioral goals. When remembering only a few items that are confusable, memory for each item becomes even more distinct (repulsion). However, when there are many items to remember, information is compressed and memories for each item become more similar (attraction). These results suggest that memory systems do not have to be accurate so long as the memories are useful.

show abstract

“…This produced 4 levels of 3D (same vs. different) and 2D (close vs. far) separation: same-close, different-close, same-far, and different-far. Note that the two memory targets were always presented in the same hemifield to maximize inter-item competition (Alvarez & Cavanagh, 2005;Cohen et al, 2016;Störmer, Alvarez, & Cavanagh, 2014). Each trial started with a 500ms fixation period during which only the 16 placeholders were shown.…”

Section: Experiments 1 Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, detecting a change in a remembered object is more challenging when the spatial configuration of the display is modified between encoding and test, highlighting the importance of spatial layout and spatial location in VWM (Hollingworth, 2007;Hollingworth & Rasmussen, 2010;Jiang, Olson, & Chun, 2000;Olson & Marshuetz, 2005;Phillips, 1974;Postle, Awh, Serences, Sutterer, & D'Esposito, 2013;Treisman & Zhang, 2006). Memory performance is improved when presenting multiple simultaneous memoranda far from each other, compared to close from each other, suggesting a role for spatial interference (Cohen, Rhee, & Alvarez, 2016;Emrich & Ferber, 2012). Furthermore, presenting memoranda sequentially in different spatial locations leads to better memory performance compared to sequentially presenting items in the same spatial location, even when location is task-irrelevant, (Pertzov & Husain, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separating memoranda in depth increases visual working memory performance

Chunharas¹,

Rademaker²,

Sprague

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visual working memory is the mechanism supporting the continued maintenance of information after sensory inputs are removed. Although the capacity of visual working memory is limited, memoranda that are spaced farther apart on a 2D display are easier to remember, potentially because neural representations are more distinct within retinotopically-organized areas of visual cortex during memory encoding, maintenance, and/or retrieval. The impact of spatial separability in depth on memory is less clear, even though depth information is essential to guide interactions with objects in the environment. On one account, separating memoranda in depth may facilitate performance if interference between items is reduced. However, depth information must be inferred indirectly from the 2D retinal image, and less is known about how visual cortex represents depth. Thus, an alternative possibility is that separation in depth does not attenuate between-item interference; separation in depth may even impair performance, as attention must be distributed across a larger volume of 3D space. We tested these alternatives using a stereo display while participants remembered the colors of stimuli presented either near or far in the 2D plane or in depth. Increasing separation in-plane and in depth both enhanced performance. Furthermore, participants who were better able to utilize stereo depth cues showed larger benefits when memoranda were separated in depth, particularly for large memory arrays. The observation that spatial separation in the inferred 3D structure of the environment improves memory performance, as is the case in 2D environments, suggests that separating memoranda in depth might reduce neural competition by utilizing cortically separable resources.

show abstract

Limits on perceptual encoding can be predicted from known receptive field properties of human visual cortex.

Cited by 13 publications

References 57 publications

Chunking as a rational strategy for lossy data compression in visual working memory

Chunking as a rational strategy for lossy data compression in visual working memory

Adaptive memory distortion in visual working memory

Separating memoranda in depth increases visual working memory performance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About