Memory Representations in Natural Tasks

The very limited capacity of short-term or working memory is one of the most prominent features of human cognition. Most studies have stressed delimiting the upper bounds of this memory in memorization tasks rather than the performance of everyday tasks. We designed a series of experiments to test the use of short-term memory in the course of a natural hand-eye task where subjects have the freedom to choose their own task parameters. In this case subjects choose not to operate at the maximum capacity of short-term memory but instead seek to minimize its use. In particular, reducing the instantaneous memory required to perform the task can be done by serializing the task with eye movements. These eye movements allow subjects to postpone the gathering of task-relevant information until just before it is required. The reluctance to use short-term memory can be explained if such memory is expensive to use with respect to the cost of the serializing strategy.

[1]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[2]  A. L. I︠A︡rbus Eye Movements and Vision , 1967 .

[3]  A. L. Yarbus,et al.  Eye Movements and Vision , 1967, Springer US.

[4]  R. Almond The therapeutic community. , 1971, Scientific American.

[5]  D. Noton,et al.  Eye movements and visual perception. , 1971, Scientific American.

[6]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[7]  Janellen Huttenlocher,et al.  Why does memory span increase with age? , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  M. Just,et al.  Eye fixations and cognitive processes , 1976, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  O'Regan Jk,et al.  Integrating visual information from successive fixations: does trans-saccadic fusion exist? , 1983 .

[10]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Integrating visual information from successive fixations:Does trans-saccadic fusion exist? , 1983, Vision Research.

[11]  S. Ullman Visual routines , 1984, Cognition.

[12]  Rodney A. Brooks,et al.  A Robust Layered Control Syste For A Mobile Robot , 2022 .

[13]  G. Legge,et al.  The importance of eye movements in the analysis of simple patterns , 1986, Vision Research.

[14]  Eileen Kowler,et al.  Reading twisted text: Implications for the role of saccades , 1987, Vision Research.

[15]  R. Bajcsy Active perception , 1988, Proc. IEEE.

[16]  Dana H. Ballard,et al.  Behavioural constraints on animate vision , 1989, Image Vis. Comput..

[17]  P. Viviani Eye movements in visual search: cognitive, perceptual and motor control aspects. , 1990, Reviews of oculomotor research.

[18]  C. Blakemore,et al.  Vision: The iconic bottleneck and the tenuous link between early visual processing and perception , 1990 .

[19]  Dana H. Ballard,et al.  Active Perception and Reinforcement Learning , 1990, Neural Computation.

[20]  Dana H. Ballard,et al.  Animate Vision , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[21]  M. Goodale,et al.  Separate visual pathways for perception and action , 1992, Trends in Neurosciences.

[22]  Michael J. Swain,et al.  Low resolution cues for guiding saccadic eye movements , 1992, Proceedings 1992 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition.

[23]  S. Rose Selective attention , 1992, Nature.

[24]  D H Ballard,et al.  Hand-eye coordination during sequential tasks. , 1992, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[25]  J. O'Regan,et al.  Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: the world as an outside memory. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

[26]  M. Goodale,et al.  Visual pathways to perception and action. , 1993, Progress in brain research.

[27]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Seeing Behind Occlusions , 1994, ECCV.

[28]  H. Collewijn,et al.  The function of visual search and memory in sequential looking tasks , 1995, Vision Research.

[29]  T. O. Nelson Metacognition, metaphors, and the measurement of human memory , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[30]  J. Small Classical antecedents for modern metaphors for memory , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[31]  T. McNamara False dichotomies and dead metaphors , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[32]  D. Algom Correspondence conception of memory: A good match is hard to find , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[33]  D. Wright Hypothesis testing in experimental and naturalistic memory research , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[34]  D. Bruce The correspondence metaphor: Prescriptive or descriptive? , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[35]  G. Zelinsky,et al.  Driving and dish-washing: Failure of the correspondence metaphor for memory , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[36]  Harry P. Bahrick,et al.  The relation between reproductive and reconstructive processing of memory content , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[37]  A. Mayes,et al.  Accuracy and quantity are poor measures of recall and recognition , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[38]  A. Ben-Ze'ev The alternative to the storehouse metaphor , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[39]  B. Schwartz Amnesia and metamemory demonstrate the importance of both metaphors , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[40]  M. Ross,et al.  Beyond the correspondence metaphor: When accuracy cannot be assessed , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[41]  A. Kruglanski The storehouse/correspondence partition in memory research: Promises and perils , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[42]  A. Koriat,et al.  The correspondence metaphor of memory: Right, wrong, or useful? , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[43]  S. Larsen Correspondence to the past: The essence of the archaeology metaphor , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[44]  Ronald P. Fisher,et al.  Implications of output-bound measures for laboratory and field research in memory , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[45]  K. White,et al.  Direct remembering and the correspondence metaphor , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[46]  J. Ellis,et al.  Let's forget the everyday/laboratory controversy , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[47]  E. Winograd Contexts and functions of retrieval , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[48]  G. Mazzoni The phenomenal object of memory and control processes , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[49]  R. Alterman Everyday memory and activity , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[50]  N. Anderson Functional memory requires a quite different value metaphor , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[51]  H. Eichenbaum The real-life/laboratory controversy as viewed from the cognitive neurobiology of animal learning and memory , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[52]  I. Begg On correspondence, accuracy, and truth , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[53]  M. Conway What do memories correspond to? , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[54]  T. Wickens,et al.  Memory, metamemory, and conditional statistics , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[55]  Problem solving and logical reasoning in the macaque monkey , 1996, Behavioural Brain Research.

[56]  A. Koriat,et al.  Memory metaphors and the real-life/laboratory controversy: Correspondence versus storehouse conceptions of memory , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.