Updating visual working memory in the change detection paradigm

Abstract

An updating version of a visual change detection paradigm was used to investigate the behavioral outcomes and event-related potential (ERP) correlates of visual working memory updating. In each trial, participants were either presented with a memory array followed by a test probe, or with two successive memory arrays. Participants were instructed to update their working memory with the information in the second array. The second array differed from the first one in all, some, or none of the items. When a subset of the items was updated, the probe could appear in the location of a repeated item or of an updated item. Two experiments are reported, using set-sizes of six and two items, respectively. Both experiments show a benefit for probing a repeated item compared to an updated item. This result is consistent with an item-specific updating process. Experiment 2 also revealed two distinct updating-related ERP components, observed in both contralateral and ipsilateral visual hemifields. Frontal electrodes were sensitive to the number of changed items in the array. This ERP component was interpreted as reflecting the modification of information in working memory. Lateral-posterior electrodes only showed a difference between a full repetition of the array and updating, regardless of the number of updated items. This component was interpreted as reflecting attention to task-relevant information rather than the updating process per se. The finding of item-specific updating supports discrete-item architecture models of working memory.

Visual working memory representation as a topological defined perceptual object

“…The ability to recognize a matched probe depended only on whether that item was repeated or updated, regardless of what happened with the other items in WM. This finding is in line with previous studies (Kessler et al, 2015). Along with Experiments 1 and 2, our results demonstrate that changes in topological properties affected the representation in VWM, indicated by a weakened repetition-benefit effect.…”

“…The four conditions exhibited no significant main effect, F(3, 45) ¼ 0.499, p ¼ 0.685, g p 2 ¼ 0.032. This result is similar to the finding of a previous study (Kessler et al, 2015). As expected, two memory arrays did not increase the difficulty of the task, and all participants could remember the first memory array carefully as required.…”

“…Participants performed an updating version of the change-detection task (Kessler et al, 2015;Luck & Vogel, 1997), as shown in Figure 1. Each trial began with a 100-ms memory array, followed by a 600-ms blank retention interval.…”

In search of the focus of attention in working memory: 13 years of the retro-cue effect

“…Removing irrelevant information frees WM capacity. The evidence supporting removal of noncued items from WM converges with the finding that visual WM's contents can be flexibly discarded to encode new, more up-to-date information on an item basis (Kessler et al, 2015), and with evidence for the removal of outdated information as a component of updating of verbal WM . 4.…”

Refixation control in free viewing: a specialized mechanism divulged by eye-movement-related brain activity

“…Particularly, the amplitude of P3b subcomponent with a peak latency of~450 ms increases when the current memory representation is modified by new information (Polich 2007). Recent studies, however, showed an earlier updating effect in the lateralized ERP components:~200 -300 ms (Kessler et al 2015). Thus, repetition suppression and memory updating predict different effects of refixation in the postsaccadic interval: whereas the former should be reflected in amplitude decrease at earlier latencies, the latter should be reflected in amplitude increase at latencies after 200 ms.…”