Influence of Sustained Visual Attention on the Prioritization of Visual Working Memory

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2025.0191

Abstract

Abstract:

Using behavioral experiments and the simultaneous acquisition technique of event-related potentials and event-related optical signals (ERP-EROS), we manipulated the probe probability of visual working memory (VWM) items to explore whether the impact of sustained visual attention on VWM prioritization is modulated by working memory resources, and to investigate the neural mechanisms underlying this prioritization. The behavioral results showed that during the VWM maintenance phase, when a task that consumed visual attention was introduced, impairment occurred for non-prioritized items when one item was prioritized, while the prioritized item remained unaffected. However, when two items were prioritized, both prioritized and non-prioritized items were impaired. The results from ERP and EROS showed that during the VWM maintenance phase, prioritizing an item, compared to the no- prioritization condition, elicited larger late positive components and negative slow waves, accompanied by increased activation in the frontal and occipital cortices. This suggests that the effect of sustained visual attention on VWM prioritization is modulated by working memory resources. The underlying mechanism for prioritization involves activation of the frontal and occipital cortices during the maintenance phase and a greater allocation of working memory resources to enhance the stability of prioritized item representations.

Key words: visual working memory, visual attention, prioritization, event-related optical signals, simultaneous acquisition

LIAN Haomin, ZHANG Qian, GU Xuemin, LI Shouxin. (2025). Influence of Sustained Visual Attention on the Prioritization of Visual Working Memory. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(2), 191-206.

Figures/Tables 15

Figure 1. The stimulus materials used in the experiment.
Note. Refer to the color version in the electronic edition, and the same holds true hereafter.

Figure 2. Flowchart of Experiment 1a.
Note. The upper part of the figure illustrates the selective cue, and the lower part presents the neutral cue; the upper part of the visual attention task indicates no change in the fixation point, and the lower part indicates a change in the fixation point.

Figure 3. VWM task accuracy under different conditions in Experiment 1a.
Note. The vertical lines in the figure represent ±1 standard deviation; * indicates p < 0.05, ** indicates p < 0.01.

Figure 4. Flowchart of Experiment 1b.
Note. The upper part of the figure illustrates the selective cue, and the lower part illustrates the neutral cue; the upper part of the visual attention task indicates no change in the fixation point, and the lower part indicates a change in the fixation point.

Figure 5. VWM task accuracy under different conditions in Experiment 1b.
Note. The vertical lines indicate ±1 standard deviation; * indicates p < 0.05.

Figure 6. Illustration of the procedure for Experiment 1c.
Note. The upper part of the figure illustrates the selective cue, and the lower part illustrates the neutral cue; the upper part in the visual attention task indicates the early visual attention task condition, and the lower part indicates the late visual attention task condition.

Figure 7. VWM task accuracy under different conditions in Experiment 1c.
Note. The vertical lines in the figure represent ±1 standard deviation; ** indicates p < 0.01.

Figure 8. Flowchart of Experiment 1a.
Note. The upper part of the figure illustrates the selective cue, and the lower part illustrates the neutral cue; the upper part of the visual attention task indicates no change in the fixation point, and the lower part indicates a change in the fixation point.

Figure 9. VWM task accuracy under different conditions in Experiment 2.
Note. The vertical lines in the figure represent ±1 standard deviation; ** indicates p < 0.01; *** indicates p < 0.001.

Figure 10. Flowchart of Experiment 3.
Note. The upper part of the figure illustrates the selective cue, and the lower part presents the neutral cue.

Figure 11. Placement of Near-Infrared Light Sources and Detectors in Experiment 3.
Note. Black circles represent detectors, white circles represent light sources, gray circles indicate unused positions, yellow circles denote the positions of F3/F4 and FC3/FC4 electrodes, and green circles indicate the positions of PO7/PO8 electrodes.

Table 1 Brain regions showing greater activation differences for the selective cue condition compared to the neutral cue condition during the VWM maintenance phase in Experiment 3.

Time Point	Brain Region	Talairach Coordinates (x, y, z)	Peak Z	Peak Z(crit)	p
416 ms	Frontal	?16, 9, 48	2.35	2.06	0.020
416 ms	Occipital	22, ?83, 33	2.30	2.14	0.016
544 ms	Frontal	34, ?6, 51	2.46	2.44	0.007
608 ms	Frontal	34, 37, 33	2.64	2.62	0.004
832 ms	Frontal	12, ?3, 56	2.38	2.12	0.017
1056 ms	Frontal	19, 29, 45	2.27	2.19	0.014
1248 ms	Occipital	7, ?83, 32	2.56	2.32	0.010
1280 ms	Occipital	9, ?88, 29	3.53	2.48	0.007

Figure 12 LPC evoked under the selective cue and neutral cue conditions in Experiment 3.
Note. The selective cue condition includes high and low probe probability conditions. The gray-shaded area represents the time window (600~800 ms) used for LPC analysis following memory items presentation.

Figure 13 NSW evoked under the selective cue and neutral cue conditions in Experiment 3.
Note. The selective cue condition includes high and low probe probability conditions. The gray-shaded area represents the time window (800~1200 ms) used for NSW analysis following memory items presentation.

Figure 14. Brain activation maps for the selective cue condition compared to the neutral cue condition during the VWM maintenance phase (with memory items presentation as the zero point).

References 52

[1]	Allen R. J., & Ueno T. (2018). Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 80(7), 1731-1743.
[2]	Atkinson A. L., Berry E. D., Waterman A. H., Baddeley A. D., Hitch G. J., & Allen R. J. (2018). Are there multiple ways to direct attention in working memory? Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 1424(1), 115-126.
[3]	Atkinson A. L., Oberauer K., Allen R. J., & Souza A. S. (2022). Why does the probe value effect emerge in working memory? Examining the biased attentional refreshing account. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(3), 891-900.
[4]	Awh E., & Jonides J. (2001). Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(3), 119-126. pmid: 11239812
[5]	Barbosa J., Stein H., Martinez R. L., Galan-Gadea A., Li S., Dalmau J.,... Compte A. (2020). Interplay between persistent activity and activity-silent dynamics in the prefrontal cortex underlies serial biases in working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 23(8), 1016-1024. doi: 10.1038/s41593-020-0644-4 pmid: 32572236
[6]	Bettencourt K. C., & Xu Y. (2016). Decoding the content of visual short-term memory under distraction in occipital and parietal areas. Nature Neuroscience, 19, 150-157. doi: 10.1038/nn.4174 pmid: 26595654
[7]	Camos V., Johnson M., Loaiza V., Portrat S., Souza A., & Vergauwe E. (2018). What is attentional refreshing in working memory? Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1424(1), 19-32.
[8]	Che X., Lian H., Zhang F., Li S., & Zheng Y. (2024). The reactivation of working memory representations affects attentional guidance. Psychophysiology, 61(3), e14514.
[9]	Che X., Wang K., Shangguan M., & Li S. (2020). The Representation of attention template in visual working memory: An EROS study. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 18(3), 297-303.
[10]	Che X., Xu H., Wang K., Zhang Q., & Li S. (2021). Precision requirement of working memory representations influences attentional guidance. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 53(7), 694-713. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2021.00694
[11]	Christophel T. B., Iamshchinina P., Yan C., Allefeld C., & Haynes J. D. (2018). Cortical specialization for attended versus unattended working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 21(4), 494-496. doi: 10.1038/s41593-018-0094-4 pmid: 29507410
[12]	Cohen J. (1992). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(3), 98-101.
[13]	Emrich S. M., Lockhart H. A., & Al-Aidroos N. (2017). Attention mediates the flexible allocation of visual working memory resources. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43(7), 1454-1465. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000398 pmid: 28368161
[14]	Ester E. F., Sprague T. C., & Serences J. T. (2015). Parietal and frontal cortex encode stimulus-specific mnemonic representations during visual working memory. Neuron, 87(4), 893-905. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.07.013 pmid: 26257053
[15]	Ester E. F., & Pytel P. (2023). Changes in behavioral priority influence the accessibility of working memory content. NeuroImage, 272, 120055.
[16]	Fabiani M., Low K. A., Wee E., Sable J. J., & Gratton G. (2006). Reduced suppression or labile memory? Mechanisms of inefficient filtering of irrelevant information in older adults. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18(4), 637-650. pmid: 16768366
[17]	Fu X., Ye C., Hu Z., Li Z., Liang T., & Liu Q. (2022). The impact of retro-cue validity on working memory representation: Evidence from electroencephalograms. Biological Psychology, 170, 108320.
[18]	Gao Z., Li J., Wu J., Dai A., Liao H., & Shen M. (2022). Diverting the focus of attention in working memory through a perceptual task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 48(6), 876-905.
[19]	Gratton G., & Corballis P. M. (1995). Removing the heart from the brain: Compensation for the pulse artifact in the photon migration signal. Psychophysiology, 32(3), 292-299. pmid: 7784538
[20]	Griffin I. C., & Nobre A. C. (2003). Orienting attention to locations in internal representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15(8), 1176-1194. doi: 10.1162/089892903322598139 pmid: 14709235
[21]	Günseli E., Fahrenfort J. J., van Moorselaar D., Daoultzis K. C., Meeter M., & Olivers C. N. (2019). EEG dynamics reveal a dissociation between storage and selective attention within working memory. Scientific Reports, 9(1), 13499. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-49577-0 pmid: 31534150
[22]	Harrison S. A., & Tong F. (2009). Decoding reveals the contents of visual working memory in early visual areas. Nature, 458(7238), 632-635.
[23]	Hitch G. J., Allen R. J., & Baddeley A. D. (2020). Attention and binding in visual working memory: Two forms of attention and two kinds of buffer storage. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82(1), 280-293.
[24]	Hitch G. J., Hu Y., Allen R. J., & Baddeley A. D. (2018). Competition for the focus of attention in visual working memory:Perceptual recency versus executive control. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1424(1), 64-75.
[25]	Hollingworth A., & Maxcey-Richard A. M. (2013). Selective maintenance in visual working memory does not require sustained visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(4), 1047-1058. doi: 10.1037/a0030238 pmid: 23067118
[26]	Hu Y., Allen R. J., Baddeley A. D., & Hitch G. J. (2016). Executive control of stimulus-driven and goal-directed attention in visual working memory. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(7), 2164-2175.
[27]	Hu Y., Hitch G. J., Baddeley A. D., Zhang M., & Allen R. J. (2014). Executive and perceptual attention play different roles in visual working memory: Evidence from suffix and strategy effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40(4), 1665-1678. doi: 10.1037/a0037163 pmid: 24933616
[28]	Huang J., Wang S., Jia S., Mo D., & Chen H. C. (2013). Cortical dynamics of semantic processing during sentence comprehension: Evidence from event-related optical signals. PloS One, 8(8), e70671.
[29]	Jeanneret S., Bartsch L. M., & Vergauwe E. (2023). To be or not to be relevant: Comparing short-and long-term consequences across working memory prioritization procedures. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 85(5), 1486-1498.
[30]	Jia K., Li Y., Gong M., Huang H., Wang Y., & Li S. (2021). Perceptual learning beyond perception: Mnemonic representation in early visual cortex and intraparietal sulcus. Journal of Neuroscience, 41(20), 4476-4486. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2780-20.2021 pmid: 33811151
[31]	Li D., Hu Y., Qi M., Zhao C., Jensen O., Huang J., & Song Y. (2023). Prioritizing flexible working memory representations through retrospective attentional strengthening. NeuroImage, 269, 119902.
[32]	Liang T., Chen X., Ye C., Zhang J., & Liu Q. (2019). Electrophysiological evidence supports the role of sustained visuospatial attention in maintaining visual WM contents. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 146, 54-62. doi: S0167-8760(19)30504-5 pmid: 31639381
[33]	Lorenc E. S., Mallett R., & Lewis-Peacock J. A. (2021). Distraction in visual working memory: Resistance is not futile. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(3), 228-239. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2020.12.004 pmid: 33397602
[34]	Lorenc E. S., Sreenivasan K. K., Nee D. E., Vandenbroucke A. R., & D'Esposito M. (2018). Flexible coding of visual working memory representations during distraction. Journal of Neuroscience, 38(23), 5267-5276. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3061-17.2018 pmid: 29739867
[35]	Ma W. J., Husain M., & Bays P. M. (2014). Changing concepts of working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 17(3), 347-356. doi: 10.1038/nn.3655 pmid: 24569831
[36]	Macedo-Pascual J., Capilla A., Campo P., Hinojosa J. A., & Poch C. (2023). Selection within working memory impairs perceptual detection. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 30(4), 1442-1451.
[37]	Oberauer K. (2002). Access to information in working memory: Exploring the focus of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(3), 411-421.
[38]	Panichello M. F., & Buschman T. J. (2021). Shared mechanisms underlie the control of working memory and attention. Nature, 592(7855), 601-605.
[39]	Proulx N., Samadani A. A., & Chau T. (2018). Quantifying fast optical signal and event-related potential relationships during a visual oddball task. NeuroImage, 178, 119-128. doi: S1053-8119(18)30438-5 pmid: 29777826
[40]	Rerko L., Souza A. S., & Oberauer K. (2014). Retro-cue benefits in working memory without sustained focal attention. Memory & Cognition, 42(5), 712-728.
[41]	Rose N. S. (2020). The dynamic-processing model of working memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 378-387.
[42]	Sandry J., & Ricker T. J. (2020). Prioritization within visual working memory reflects a flexible focus of attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82(6), 2985-3004.
[43]	Schmidt B. K., Vogel E. K., Woodman G. F., & Luck S. J. (2002). Voluntary and automatic attentional control of visual working memory. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(5), 754-763.
[44]	Schneider D., Barth A., Getzmann S., & Wascher E. (2017). On the neural mechanisms underlying the protective function of retroactive cuing against perceptual interference: Evidence by event-related potentials of the EEG. Biological Psychology, 124, 47-56. doi: S0301-0511(17)30006-6 pmid: 28115199
[45]	Souza A. S., Czoschke S., & Lange E. B. (2020). Gaze-based and attention-based rehearsal in spatial working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(5), 980-1003.
[46]	Tas A. C., Luck S. J., & Hollingworth A. (2016). The relationship between visual attention and visual working memory encoding: A dissociation between covert and overt orienting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(8), 1121-1138. doi: 10.1037/xhp0000212 pmid: 26854532
[47]	Teng C., & Postle B. R. (2024). Investigating the roles of the visual and parietal cortex in representing content versus context in visual working memory. eNeuro, 11(2), ENEURO. 0270-20.2024.
[48]	Wang M., Liu H., Chen Y., Yang P., & Fu S. (2023). Different prioritization states of working memory representations affect visual searches: Evidence from an event-related potential study. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 193, 112246.
[49]	Williams M., Pouget P., Boucher L., & Woodman G. F. (2013). Visual-spatial attention aids the maintenance of object representations in visual working memory. Memory & Cognition, 41(5), 698-715.
[50]	Zhang W., & Luck S. J. (2008). Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory. Nature, 453(7192), 233-235.
[51]	Zhang Z., & Lewis-Peacock J. A. (2023a). Prioritization sharpens working memories but does not protect them from distraction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(4), 1158-1174.
[52]	Zhang Z., & Lewis-Peacock J. A. (2023b). Bend but don’t break: Prioritization protects working memory from displacement but leaves it vulnerable to distortion from distraction. Cognition, 239, 105574.