Temporal Expectation Improves Recognition Memory for Spatially Attended Objects

Abstract

Recent evidence suggests that temporal expectation is beneficial to memory formation. Rhythmic presentation of stimuli during encoding enhances subsequent recognition and is associated with distinct neural activity compared with when stimuli are presented in an arrhythmic manner. However, no prior study has examined how temporal expectation interacts with another important form of facilitation—spatial attention—to affect memory. This study systematically manipulated temporal expectation and spatial attention during encoding to examine their combined effect on behavioral recognition and associated ERPs. Participants performed eight experimental blocks consisting of an encoding phase and recognition test, with EEG recorded throughout. During encoding, pairs of objects and checkerboards were presented and participants were cued to attend to the left or right stream and detect targets as quickly as possible. In four blocks, stimulus presentation followed a rhythmic (constant, predictable) temporal structure, and in the other four blocks, stimulus onset was arrhythmic (random, unpredictable). An interaction between temporal expectation and spatial attention emerged, with greater recognition in the rhythmic than the arrhythmic condition for spatially attended items. Analysis of memory-specific ERP components uncovered effects of spatial attention. There were late positive component and FN400 old/new effects in the attended condition for both rhythmic and arrhythmic items, whereas in the unattended condition, there was an FN400 old/new effect and no late positive component effect. The study provides new evidence that memory improvement as a function of temporal expectation is dependent upon spatial attention.

Neural networks representing temporal expectation in mice

“…As temporal patterns are part of our daily life, these resulting expectations can improve the processing of task-relevant information (Rohenkohl et al, 2012), whereas violations of expectations can also enhance selective attention (M. Tang et al, 2023;X. Tang et al, 2016), and hasten learning (Jin et al, 2020;Jones et al, 2022). It is well established that humans are able to extract regularities in the temporal structure of sensory stimuli (Ball et al, 2022;Ball, Michels, et al, 2018;Nobre & van Ede, 2018), which requires time-keeping mechanisms in the brain (Finnerty et al, 2015).…”

Attention to space and time: Independent or interactive systems? A narrative review

“…Since the objective of this review is to elucidate whether spatial and temporal attention operate independently or interactively to enhance behavior, we have exclusively included studies that investigated their relationship. Studies that solely compared spatial and temporal attention separately (e.g., Griffin, Miniussi & Nobre, 2002 ; Sharp, Melcher, & Hickey, 2019 ; Tang et al, 2013 ) or that focused on dimensions other than the spatial and temporal ones (e.g., social orienting, Hayward & Ristic, 2015 ; memory processes; Jones et al, 2022 ) have been excluded. In the Discussion section, we summarize the main findings regarding the relationship between spatial and temporal attention and highlight some critical gaps that require to be addressed by future research.…”

The Relationship between Rhythmic Temporal Attention and Endogenous and Exogenous Spatial Attention

“…Jones (2015) used the Posner cue task to explore stimulation with visual, auditory, and cross-modal audiovisual rhythms, and found that exogenous temporal attention and endogenous spatial attention did not interact [14]. Jones et al found that temporal attention can improve recognition memory for spatially noticed objects [31].…”