2014
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2013.789543
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spatial Transposition Gradients in Visual Working Memory

Abstract: In list memory, access to individual items reflects limits of temporal distinctiveness. This is reflected in the finding that neighbouring list items tend to be confused most often. This article investigates the analogous effect of spatial proximity in a visual working-memory task. Items were presented in different locations varying in spatial distance. A retro-cue indicated the location of the item relevant for the subsequent memory test. In two recognition experiments, probes matching spatially close neighbo… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
39
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(51 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
10
39
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The IMM in its full version (and version bsc) makes one prediction that distinguishes it from the mixture model: Intrusions from nontargets should depend on their proximity to the target on the cue-feature dimension. This prediction has received support in some previous experiments (Bays, 2016;Rerko, Oberauer, & Lin, 2014), and again in the experiments reanalyzed here (in particular Experiment 2). At the same time, the recovery simulations for the HIMM show that the signal of distance-dependent nontarget intrusions is likely to be weak in data from experiments with conventional numbers of participants and trials, and this was also noticeable in Experiment 1.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…The IMM in its full version (and version bsc) makes one prediction that distinguishes it from the mixture model: Intrusions from nontargets should depend on their proximity to the target on the cue-feature dimension. This prediction has received support in some previous experiments (Bays, 2016;Rerko, Oberauer, & Lin, 2014), and again in the experiments reanalyzed here (in particular Experiment 2). At the same time, the recovery simulations for the HIMM show that the signal of distance-dependent nontarget intrusions is likely to be weak in data from experiments with conventional numbers of participants and trials, and this was also noticeable in Experiment 1.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Such an effect has previously been described for spatial proximity when the target is cued by locations (Emrich and Ferber, 2012; Rerko et al, 2014; for a meta-analysis, see Bays, 2016). Here, we have experimentally confirmed the cue similarity effect independent of the feature dimension used for the cue, and quantitatively accounted for the effects in the population model.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 56%
“…This benchmark is qualified by Benchmark 4.1.2 (Appendix B). (Farrell & Lewandowsky, 2004 (Rerko et al, 2014) Benchmark 4.1.2. Fill-in effect in serial recall (C).…”
Section: Benchmark 41 Confusions Of Target Item With Other Items Inmentioning
confidence: 99%