What you Say Matters: Exploring Visual–Verbal Interactions in Visual Working Memory

The aim of this study was to explore whether the content of a simple concurrent verbal load task determines the extent of its interference on memory for coloured shapes. The task consisted of remembering four visual items while repeating aloud a pair of words that varied in terms of imageability and relatedness to the task set. At test, a cue appeared that was either the colour or the shape of one of the previously seen objects, with participants required to select the object's other feature from a visual array. During encoding and retention, there were four verbal load conditions: (a) a related, shape–colour pair (from outside the experimental set, i.e., “pink square”); (b) a pair of unrelated but visually imageable, concrete, words (i.e., “big elephant”); (c) a pair of unrelated and abstract words (i.e., “critical event”); and (d) no verbal load. Results showed differential effects of these verbal load conditions. In particular, imageable words (concrete and related conditions) interfered to a greater degree than abstract words. Possible implications for how visual working memory interacts with verbal memory and long-term memory are discussed.

[1]  D. J. Murray,et al.  The effect of articulatory suppression on short-term recognition. , 1988 .

[2]  A. Collins.  The Psychology of Memory. , 2001 .

[3]  M. D’Esposito.  Working memory. , 2008, Handbook of clinical neurology.

[4]  Taiji Ueno,et al.  What goes through the gate? Exploring interference with visual feature binding , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[5]  Is the Articulatory Loop Articulatory or Auditory? Reexamining the Effects of Concurrent Articulation on Immediate Serial Recall , 1995 .

[6]  Edward K. Vogel,et al.  The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions , 1997, Nature.

[7]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Binding in visual working memory: The role of the episodic buffer , 2011, Neuropsychologia.

[8]  Roberto Dell'Acqua,et al.  Attentional and structural constraints on visual encoding , 1999 .

[9]  J. Richardson,et al.  Articulatory rehearsal and phonological storage in working memory , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[10]  Charles Hulme,et al.  Concrete words are easier to recall than abstract words: Evidence for a semantic contribution to short-term serial recall. , 1999 .

[11]  Douglas L Medin,et al.  The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Volume 30 , 1993 .

[12]  Kevin Dent,et al.  Verbal coding and the storage of form-position associations in visual-spatial short-term memory. , 2005, Acta psychologica.

[13]  Nelson Cowan,et al.  Visual working memory is disrupted by covert verbal retrieval , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  K. Holyoak.  Mental representations. , 1982, Science.

[15]  D. J. Murray.  Articulation and acoustic confusability in short-term memory. , 1968 .

[16]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Is the binding of visual features in working memory resource-demanding? , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  G. Dell,et al.  A Case-Series Test of the Interactive Two-step Model of Lexical Access: Predicting Word Repetition from Picture Naming. , 2007, Journal of memory and language.

[18]  B. Postle,et al.  Effects of verbal and nonverbal interference on spatial and object visual working memory , 2005, Memory & cognition.

[19]  N. Cowan.  The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[20]  A. Baddeley,et al.  Word length and the structure of short-term memory , 1975 .

[21]  A. Baddeley.  The episodic buffer: a new component of working memory? , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[22]  Nelson Cowan,et al.  When visual and verbal memories compete: Evidence of cross-domain limits in working memory , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.