Object-load and feature-load modulate EEG in a short-term memory task

Behavioral studies have indicated that multiple features of one object can be stored in working memory without additional costs. In contrast, visual search experiments revealed that search for a multi-featured object takes more time than for a single-featured object. We used EEG to differentiate the effect of object-load and feature-load in a short-term memory task. We independently varied the amount of objects and features that had to be memorized. Object-load modulated P3 amplitude during encoding and induced 10 Hz oscillations during the retention interval. Feature-load modulated the P3 during retrieval. Thus, only object-load seemed to influence encoding and retention while feature-load played a crucial role during retrieval. Our results demonstrate that object-load and feature-load influence short-term memory at different stages.

[1]  A. Kok.  On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. , 2001, Psychophysiology.

[2]  A Gevins,et al.  Dynamic cortical networks of verbal and spatial working memory: effects of memory load and task practice. , 1998, Cerebral cortex.

[3]  W. Klimesch,et al.  'Paradoxical' alpha synchronization in a memory task. , 1999, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[4]  A. Treisman,et al.  Illusory conjunctions in the perception of objects , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[5]  J. Lisman,et al.  Oscillations in the alpha band (9-12 Hz) increase with memory load during retention in a short-term memory task. , 2002, Cerebral cortex.

[6]  A. Treisman,et al.  A feature-integration theory of attention , 1980, Cognitive Psychology.

[7]  Susan L. Franzel,et al.  Guided search: an alternative to the feature integration model for visual search. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  C S Herrmann,et al.  Magnetoencephalographic responses to illusory figures: early evoked gamma is affected by processing of stimulus features. , 2000, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[9]  G. Woodman,et al.  Storage of features, conjunctions and objects in visual working memory. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[10]  C. Herrmann,et al.  Gamma responses and ERPs in a visual classification task , 1999, Clinical Neurophysiology.

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

[12]  Yuhong V. Jiang,et al.  Is visual short-term memory object based? Rejection of the “strong-object” hypothesis , 2002, Perception & psychophysics.

[13]  J. Wolfe.  Moving towards solutions to some enduring controversies in visual search , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[14]  G. V. Simpson,et al.  Parieto‐occipital ∼1 0Hz activity reflects anticipatory state of visual attention mechanisms , 1998 .

[15]  D. Hubel,et al.  Segregation of form, color, movement, and depth: anatomy, physiology, and perception. , 1988, Science.

[16]  Hans-Jochen Heinze,et al.  Representations in human visual short-term memory: an event-related brain potential study , 1999, Neuroscience Letters.

[17]  A. Treisman,et al.  Binding in short-term visual memory. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[18]  A. Burgess,et al.  Paradox lost? Exploring the role of alpha oscillations during externally vs. internally directed attention and the implications for idling and inhibition hypotheses. , 2003, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[19]  L. Robertson.  Binding, spatial attention and perceptual awareness , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[20]  W. Klimesch,et al.  Frequency characteristics of evoked and oscillatory electroencephalic activity in a human memory scanning task , 2002, Neuroscience Letters.