The right parietal lobe is critical for visual working memory

Berryhill, Marian E.; Olson, Ingrid R.

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2008.01.009

Cited by 96 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This implies that the right IPC can compensate for a suppression of the left IPC but not vice versa. In line with previous findings, patients with right parietal lesions, often lacking symptoms of hemispatial neglect (Vallar and Perani, 1986), are impaired in visuospatial working memory (Berryhill and Olson, 2008). The opposite effect has recently been demonstrated in a TMS study showing improved performance in a visuospatial working memory task when applying resting motor threshold TMS to the right PPC during the delay period (Yamanaka et al, 2010).…”

Section: Working Memory Maintenance (Memory Delay)supporting

confidence: 87%

Working memory maintenance of grasp-target information in the human posterior parietal cortex

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Working Memory Maintenance (Memory Delay)supporting

confidence: 87%

Working memory maintenance of grasp-target information in the human posterior parietal cortex

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…These fMRI data point toward parietal involvement in WM maintenance, but converging evidence from neuropsychological patients is only partly consistent with this view. We found that patients with bilateral parietal damage were selectively impaired at blocks of WM trials probed by old/new recognition but not recall (Berryhill and Olson, 2008b). Yet, when recall and recognition WM trials were intermingled making the retrieval demands unpredictable these same patient www.frontiersin.org participants could perform normally on recognition WM trials (Berryhill et al, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Parietal Contributions to Visual Working Memory Depend on Task Difficulty

Jones¹,

Crane²,

Feenstra³

et al. 2012

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of parietal contributions to working memory (WM) remain poorly understood but of considerable interest. We previously reported that posterior parietal damage selectively impaired WM probed by recognition (Berryhill and Olson, 2008a). Recent studies provided support using a neuromodulatory technique, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) applied to the right parietal cortex (P4). These studies confirmed parietal involvement in WM because parietal tDCS altered WM performance: anodal current tDCS improved performance in a change detection task, and cathodal current tDCS impaired performance on a sequential presentation task. Here, we tested whether these complementary results were due to different degrees of parietal involvement as a function of WM task demands, WM task difficulty, and/or participants' WM capacity. In Experiment 1, we applied cathodal and anodal tDCS to the right parietal cortex and tested participants on both previously used WM tasks. We observed an interaction between tDCS (anodal, cathodal), WM task difficulty, and participants' WM capacity. When the WM task was difficult, parietal stimulation (anodal or cathodal) improved WM performance selectively in participants with high WM capacity. In the low WM capacity group, parietal stimulation (anodal or cathodal) impaired WM performance. These nearly equal and opposite effects were only observed when the WM task was challenging, as in the change detection task. Experiment 2 probed the interplay of WM task difficulty and WM capacity in a parametric manner by varying set size in the WM change detection task. Here, the effect of parietal stimulation (anodal or cathodal) on the high WM capacity group followed a linear function as WM task difficulty increased with set size. The low WM capacity participants were largely unaffected by tDCS. These findings provide evidence that parietal involvement in WM performance depends on both WM capacity and WM task demands. We discuss these findings in terms of alternative WM strategies employed by low and high WM capacity individuals. We speculate that low WM capacity individuals do not recruit the posterior parietal lobe for WM tasks as efficiently as high WM capacity individuals. Consequently, tDCS provides greater benefit to individuals with high WM capacity.

show abstract

“…Therefore, we expected to find interaction effects between theta and gamma oscillations at parietal and occipital regions. As suggested by several neuroimaging studies (Jonides et al, 1993;D'Esposito et al, 1998;Berryhill and Olson, 2008;van der Ham et al, 2009) visuospatial working memory is lateralized with stronger right hemispheric activation. Thus, it was hypothesized that memory matching-related theta-gamma phase coupling should be stronger at right compared to left posterior recording sites.…”

Section: Contents Lists Available At Sciencedirectmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Blue lines indicate higher interregional phase coupling for the non-match than match, red lines indicate higher interregional phase synchronization for the match than non-match condition. working memory (Jonides et al, 1993;Berryhill and Olson 2008). Moreover, evidence indicates that there is hemispheric specialization regarding the processing of visual features.…”

Section: Cross-frequency Phase Synchronizationmentioning

confidence: 99%