Adaptive visual working memory: Expecting a delayed estimation task enhances visual working memory precision.

Abstract

Two of the dominating tasks in the visual working memory (VWM) literature are the Delayed Estimation (DE) task and the Change Detection (CD) task. However, there are no studies that directly compared how participants' expectation to be tested in these tasks impacts memory formation. Here, three experiments interspersed DE and CD trials with identical displays until the reporting stage. During each session, the frequency of trials of each task was altered to manipulate expectations of which task would be required. Expectation of a DE task led to an increase in the number of fixations during encoding and to more precise estimation. By contrast, expectation of a CD trial did not modulate CD accuracy. These results suggest that the precision with which information is encoded into VWM differs between these two tasks. This has implications for current theoretical debates on VWM and underscores the importance of the typically overlooked effect of task type on memory performance. Public Significance StatementThe temporal retention and manipulation of visual information is typically termed visual working memory (VWM). Performance in VWM tasks is predictive of success in various real-life aspects such as educational achievements. The current study demonstrates the flexible and efficient nature of VWM-a task that requires more precision recruits more resources. The findings underscore the vast and largely overlooked role of task demands on working memory performance. Thus, caution should be exercised when making theoretical conclusions without taking into account task effects.

Testing expectations and retrieval practice modulate repetition learning of visuospatial arrays.

“…If we assume that the quality of a memory trace which is laid down in episodic memory for each trial depends on the current representation in working memory, then this can influence the likelihood of recognizing repeating information. For example, if the expectation of a recognition test leads to a less precise representation in working memory, as has been shown by Cohen-Dallal et al (2023), this would also lead to a less precise representation in episodic long-term memory. Consequently, this weaker memory trace would decrease the likelihood of recognizing a repeated encounter of the same information, thereby decreasing the chance of learning from repetition.…”

“…One possibility is that expectations about the testing format influence how information is encoded into memory. Previous work has shown that expecting a recall test compared to a recognition test can influence memory in various ways (Carey & Lockhart, 1973; Cohen-Dallal et al, 2023; Duncan & Murdock, 2000; Schmidt, 1983; Thiede, 1996; Thiede et al, 2011). For example, Thiede (1996) has shown that participants studied longer and performed better when they were expecting a recall compared to a recognition test.…”

“…Therefore, one possible explanation is that full recall not only facilitates learning by the increased retrieval practice during the test itself but also by the way representations are formed in working memory in expectation of the retrieval demands. Previous literature shows that different testing expectations can influence how information is encoded into memory (Carey & Lockhart, 1973; Cohen-Dallal et al, 2023; Duncan & Murdock, 2000; Schmidt, 1983; Thiede, 1996). When participants are not able to anticipate the testing procedure, they might tend to prepare for the more difficult test, which then facilitates learning even for single-item recall.…”

Individual Variation in Encoding Strategy Optimization in Visual Working Memory: Evidence From a Change Detection Task

“…Second, the role of task demands in strategy selection is largely underexplored. Recent studies suggest that, even without strategy instructions, we are able to adjust strategies according to different task demands (Cohen-Dallal et al, 2023;Donkin et al, 2016;Fougnie et al, 2016;Udale et al, 2018;van Lamsweerde et al, 2016). Yet, very few studies have explored how strategy choice depends on both individual and task factors (Cusack et al, 2009;Linke et al, 2011;Udale et al, 2018).…”

Search without building memories: Failure of visual recall for easy search tasks in natural scenes

“…Scenes also never repeated across trials so remembering information about the scenes would not benefit future searches. Additionally, the response format of both the pre-surprise and surprise tasks used the same drawing tools to rule out the possibility of errors induced by unexpected response format changes (Cohen-Dallal et al, 2023;Swan et al, 2017), and the incidental memory probe appeared immediately after viewing the search display to minimize the opportunity for information to be lost due to decay and interference (Souza & Oberauer, 2015;Zhang & Luck. 2009).…”