The mechanism of retro-cue effect in visual working memory: Cognitive phase separation
YE Chaoxiong1,2,HU Zhonghua1,LIANG Tengfei1,3,ZHANG Jiafeng4,5,XU Qianru1,2,LIU Qiang1()
1 Institute of Brain and Psychological Sciences, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu 610000, China 2 Department of Psychology, University of Jyvaskyla, Jyvaskyla 40014, Finland 3 Research Center of Brain and Cognitive Neuroscience, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian 116029, China 4 CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China 5 Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
Retro-cue effect (RCE) refers to the phenomenon that individuals can use retro-cues to improve their visual working memory (VWM) performance of target items after the disappearance of memory targets. To explain the mechanism of RCE in VWM, five different hypotheses have been proposed by previous studies: the hypothesis of enhancing target representations, the hypothesis of forgetting non-target representations, the hypothesis of preventing memory degradation, the hypothesis of preventing interference from probe array and the hypothesis of cognitive phase separation. Although RCE has been repeatedly observed in previous studies, the mechanism of RCE remains unclear. In this study, we conducted three experiments to test these hypotheses.
In Experiment 1, participants were asked to memorize four colors in a recall task. They needed to recall the color of the target item when the probe array presented. There are three experimental conditions, the normal cue condition, the short interval no-cue condition, and the long interval no-cue condition. In the normal cue condition, a memory array (four colored squares) presented for 200 ms. Then, the memory array disappeared for 450 ms and a retro-cue presented, followed by a 900 ms blank. Then the probe array presented. In the short interval no-cue condition and long interval no-cue condition, no retro-cue presented after the memory array, but the probe array would present after the memory array disappeared for 450 ms (short interval no-cue condition) or 1400 ms (long interval no-cue condition). The design and procedure of Experiment 2 were similar to those of Experiment 1, except we used a grey-wheel cue condition and a colored-wheel cue condition to replace the long interval no-cue condition. These two new conditions were similar to the normal cue condition, except the retro-cue would appear with a distractor of a gray wheel (grey-wheel cue condition) or with a distractor of a colored wheel (colored-wheel cue condition). The design and procedure of Experiment 3 were similar to those of Experiment 2, except a long-grey-wheel short-cue condition and a long-grey-wheel long-cue condition were used to replace the normal cue condition and colored cue condition. In the long-grey-wheel short-cue condition, the retro-cue presented for 100 ms, but the grey wheel presented for 1000 ms. In the long-grey-wheel long-cue condition, the retro-cue and grey wheel presented for 1000 ms.
The results of Experiment 1 showed that there was no significant difference in memory performance between the short interval no-cue condition and long interval no-cue condition, while the performance of the normal cue condition was better than that of short and long interval no-cue conditions. The results of Experiment 2 showed that participants obtained the RCE under the normal cue, the grey-wheel cue, and the colored-wheel cue conditions. However, the degrees of RCE obtained by these three conditions were different (normal cue > grey-wheel cue > colored-wheel cue). The results of Experiment 3 showed that participants obtained the RCE under the grey-wheel cue condition, the long-grey-wheel short-cue condition, and long-grey-wheel long-cue condition. The degree of RCE obtained by these three conditions was the same.
The results of the present study supported the hypothesis of cognitive phase separation, which suggested that the retro-cue can separate the internal attention reallocation process and decision-making process, avoiding cognitive interference from the probe display. In addition, when the retro-cue was accompanied by the distractors, the type of distractors (rather than the presentation time) affected the degree of RCE. This study provides further evidence for the hypothesis of cognitive phase separation, which is crucial to solve the debate on the mechanism of RCE and to understand the relationship between attention and VWM.
Bays P. M., Catalao R. F. G., & Husain M . (2009). The precision of visual working memory is set by allocation of a shared resource. Journal of Vision, 9(10), 7.
Chun M. M., Golomb J. D., & Turk-Browne N. B . (2011). A taxonomy of external and internal attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 73-101.
Fukuda K., & Vogel E. K . (2009). Human variation in overriding attentional capture. Journal of Neuroscience, 29(27), 8726-8733.
Griffin I. C., & Nobre A. C . (2003). Orienting attention to locations in internal representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15, 1176-1194.
Hitch G. J., Allen R. J., & Baddeley A. D . (2019). Attention and binding in visual working memory: Two forms of attention and two kinds of buffer storage. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81, 1-14.
Hollingworth A., Richard A. M., & Luck S. J . (2008). Understanding the function of visual short-term memory: Transsaccadic memory, object correspondence, and gaze correction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(1), 163-181.
Irwin D. E . (1991). Information integration across saccadic eye movements. Cognitive Psychology, 23(3), 420-456.
Kuo B.-C., Stokes M. G., & Nobre A. C . (2012). Attention modulates maintenance of representations in visual short-term memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(1), 51-60.
Liang T. F., Wu H. Y., Zhang Y., Long F. F., Chen J. T., Hu Z. H., & Liu Q . (2018). Attentional selection in the perceptual scenes and internal working memory representations: A unitized perspective. Advances in Psychological Science, 26(4), 625-635.
Luck S. J., & Vogel E. K . (2013). Visual working memory capacity: from psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(8), 391-400.
Makovski T., & Jiang Y. V . (2007). Distributing versus focusing attention in visual short-term memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(6), 1072-1078.
Makovski T., & Jiang Y. V . (2008). Proactive interference from items previously stored in visual working memory. Memory & Cognition, 36(1), 43-52.
Makovski T., & Pertzov Y . (2015). Attention and memory protection: Interactions between retrospective attention cueing and interference. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(9), 1735-1743.
Matsukura M., Luck S. J., & Vecera S. P . (2007). Attention effects during visual short-term memory maintenance: Protection or prioritization? Percept Psychophys, 69(8), 1422-1434.
Nie Q.-Y., Ding X. W., Chen J. Y., & Conci M . (2018). Social attention directs working memory maintenance. Cognition, 171, 85-94.
Nie Q.-Y., Müller H. J., & Conci M . (2017). Hierarchical organization in visual working memory: From global ensemble to individual object structure. Cognition, 159, 85-96.
Oberauer K . (2019). Working memory and attention - A conceptual analysis and review. Journal of Cognition, 2(1), 36.
Pertzov Y., Bays P. M., Joseph S., & Husain M . (2013). Rapid forgetting prevented by retrospective attention cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(5), 1224-1231.
Rerko L., & Oberauer K . (2013). Focused, unfocused, and defocused information in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(4), 1075-1096.
Schneider D., Mertes C., & Wascher E . (2016). The time course of visuo-spatial working memory updating revealed by a retro-cuing paradigm. Scientific Reports, 6, 21442.
Souza A. S., & Oberauer K . (2016). In search of the focus of attention in working memory: 13 years of the retro-cue effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(7), 1839-1860.
Souza A. S., Rerko L., Lin H.-Y., & Oberauer K . (2014). Focused attention improves working memory: implications for flexible-resource and discrete-capacity models. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(7), 2080-2102.
Souza A. S., Rerko L., & Oberauer K . (2014). Unloading and reloading working memory: Attending to one item frees capacity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(3), 1237-1256.
Suchow J. W., Brady T. F., Fougnie D., & Alvarez G. A . (2013). Modeling visual working memory with the MemToolbox. Journal of Vision, 13(10), 9.
Tanoue R. T., & Berryhill M. E . (2012). The mental wormhole: internal attention shifts without regard for distance. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74(6), 1199-1215.
Vogel E. K., Woodman G. F., & Luck S. J . (2006). The time course of consolidation in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(6), 1436-1451.
Williams M., Hong S. W., Kang M.-S., Carlisle N. B., & Woodman G. F . (2013). The benefit of forgetting. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(2), 348-355.
Ye C. X., Hu Z. H., Ristaniemi T., Gendron M., & Liu Q . (2016). Retro-dimension-cue benefit in visual working memory. Scientific Reports, 6, 35573.
Ye C. X., Sun H. J., Xu Q. R., Liang T. F., Zhang Y., & Liu Q . (2019). Working memory capacity affects trade-off between quality and quantity only when stimulus exposure duration is sufficient: Evidence for the two-phase model. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 8727.
Zhang M., & Zhang Y . (2007). The relationship between working memory and selective attention. Advances in Psychological Science, 15(1), 8-15.