Visual working memory load does not eliminate visuomotor repetition effects

When we respond to a stimulus, our ability to quickly execute this response depends on how combinations of stimulus and response features match to previous combinations of stimulus and response features. Some kind of memory representations must be underlying these visuomotor repetition effects. In this paper, we tested the hypothesis that visual working memory stores the stimulus information that gives rise to these effects. Participants discriminated the colors of successive stimuli while holding either three locations or colors in visual working memory. If visual working memory maintains the information about a previous event that leads to visuomotor repetition effects, then occupying working memory with colors or locations should selectively disrupt color–response and location–response repetition effects. The results of two experiments showed that neither color nor spatial memory load eliminated visuomotor repetition effects. Since working memory load did not disrupt repetition effects, it is unlikely that visual working memory resources are used to store the information that underlies visuomotor repetitions effects. Instead, these results are consistent with the view that visuomotor repetition effects stem from automatic long-term memory retrieval, but can also be accommodated by supposing separate buffers for visual working memory and response selection.

[1]  G. Woodman,et al.  Visual search is slowed when visuospatial working memory is occupied , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[2]  Matthew D. Hilchey,et al.  Feature integration in basic detection and localization tasks: Insights from the attentional orienting literature , 2018, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[3]  Denis G. Pelli,et al.  ECVP '07 Abstracts , 2007, Perception.

[4]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Processing of representations in declarative and procedural working memory , 2012, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[5]  M. Chun,et al.  Organization of visual short-term memory. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[6]  B. Hommel,et al.  Intentional weighting: a basic principle in cognitive control , 2012, Psychological research.

[7]  B. Hommel,et al.  Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus–task bindings in task-shift costs , 2003, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  C. Frings,et al.  Dissociation of binding and learning processes , 2017, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Consciousness is not necessary for visual feature binding , 2015, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  P. Bertelson,et al.  Serial Choice Reaction-time as a Function of Response versus Signal-and-Response Repetition , 1965, Nature.

[11]  Arni Kristjánsson,et al.  The boundary conditions of priming of visual search: From passive viewing through task-relevant working memory load , 2013, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[12]  B. Hommel,et al.  A feature-integration account of sequential effects in the Simon task , 2004, Psychological research.

[13]  Daryl E. Wilson,et al.  Long-term facilitation of return: A response-retrieval effect , 2013, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[14]  Matthew D. Hilchey,et al.  Response-mediated spatial priming despite perfectly valid target location cues and intervening response events , 2017 .

[15]  B. Hommel,et al.  What do we learn from binding features? Evidence for multilevel feature integration. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  How to measure working memory capacity in the change detection paradigm , 2011, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  Matthew D. Hilchey,et al.  Dissociating Orienting Biases From Integration Effects With Eye Movements , 2018, Psychological science.

[18]  Alessandra S. Souza,et al.  Interference within and between declarative and procedural representations in working memory , 2014 .

[19]  C. Bundesen.  A theory of visual attention. , 1990, Psychological review.

[20]  Andrea Kiesel,et al.  New perspectives on human multitasking , 2018, Psychological Research.

[21]  Matthew D. Hilchey,et al.  Is attention really biased toward the last target location in visual search? Attention, response rules, distractors, and eye movements , 2019, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[22]  B. Hommel.  How much attention does an event file need? , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  Jay Pratt,et al.  The role of spatial working memory in inhibition of return: Evidence from divided attention tasks , 2003, Perception & psychophysics.

[24]  Harold Pashler,et al.  Procedural learning: II. Intertrial repetition effects in speeded-choice tasks. , 1991 .

[25]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of pop-out: I. Role of features , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[26]  B. Hommel.  Event files: feature binding in and across perception and action , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  K. Nakayama,et al.  Priming of popout: III. A short-term implicit memory system beneficial for rapid target selection , 2000 .

[28]  J. Brockmole,et al.  Bound feature combinations in visual short-term memory are fragile but influence long-term learning , 2009 .

[29]  Yuhong Jiang,et al.  Proactive interference from items previously stored in visual working memory , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[30]  S. Luck,et al.  Proactive Interference Does Not Meaningfully Distort Visual Working Memory Capacity Estimates in the Canonical Change Detection Task , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[31]  Darryl W. Schneider,et al.  A memory-based model of Hick’s law , 2011, Cognitive Psychology.

[32]  G. Woodman,et al.  Selective storage and maintenance of an object’s features in visual working memory , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[33]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Theory of Event Coding (TEC) V2.0: Representing and controlling perception and action , 2019, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[34]  B. Hommel,et al.  Attentional control of the creation and retrieval of stimulus–response bindings , 2014, Psychological research.

[35]  Hyunkyu Lee,et al.  Mechanisms of priming of pop-out: Stored representations or feature-gain modulations? , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[36]  Motonori Yamaguchi,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility with pure and mixed mappings in a flight task environment. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[37]  J. de Houwer,et al.  Retrieval of incidental stimulus-response associations as a source of negative priming. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[38]  Nancy B. Carlisle,et al.  How visual working memory contents influence priming of visual attention , 2018, Psychological research.

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

[40]  Yang Zhang,et al.  Spatial working memory load impairs manual but not saccadic inhibition of return , 2011, Vision Research.

[41]  B. Hommel.  Event Files: Evidence for Automatic Integration of Stimulus-Response Episodes , 1998 .

[42]  Trisha N Patel,et al.  Exploring the contributions of spatial and non-spatial working memory to priming of pop-out , 2017, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[43]  B. Hommel,et al.  Visual attention and the temporal dynamics of feature integration , 2004 .

[44]  M. Posner,et al.  Components of visual orienting , 1984 .

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

[46]  Edward K Vogel,et al.  Flexibility in visual working memory: Accurate change detection in the face of irrelevant variations in position , 2012, Visual cognition.

[47]  Zachary J. J. Roper,et al.  Visual short-term memory load strengthens selective attention , 2014, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[48]  R. Henson,et al.  Stimulus–response bindings in priming , 2014, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[49]  T Kleinsorge,et al.  Response repetition benefits and costs. , 1999, Acta psychologica.

[50]  G. Logan,et al.  On the Use of a Concurrent Memory Load to Measure Attention and Automaticity , 1979 .

[51]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[52]  G. Logan.  Repetition priming and automaticity: Common underlying mechanisms? , 1990, Cognitive Psychology.

[53]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Design for a working memory. , 2009 .

[54]  Bernhard Hommel,et al.  Do stimulus–response bindings survive a task switch? , 2006 .

[55]  Matthew D. Hilchey,et al.  Intervening response events between identification targets do not always turn repetition benefits into repetition costs , 2017, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[56]  S W Keele,et al.  Processing demands of sequential information , 1973, Memory & cognition.

[57]  Daryl E. Wilson,et al.  Long-Term Inhibition of Return for Spatial Locations: Evidence for a Memory Retrieval Account , 2006, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[58]  Joshua K. Hartshorne.  Visual Working Memory Capacity and Proactive Interference , 2008, PloS one.

[59]  James R. Schmidt,et al.  The Parallel Episodic Processing (PEP) model 2.0: A single computational model of stimulus-response binding, contingency learning, power curves, and mixing costs , 2016, Cognitive Psychology.

[60]  B. Hommel,et al.  When an object is more than a binding of its features: Evidence for two mechanisms of visual feature integration , 2009 .

[61]  David W. Sutterer,et al.  The Role of Long-Term Memory in a Test of Visual Working Memory: Proactive Facilitation but No Proactive Interference , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.