空间位置比非空间特征更难从工作记忆中移除

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.1028

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 从工作记忆中移除无关信息有助于高效利用其有限资源。关于工作记忆移除信息的研究均聚焦于非空间特征的移除, 而空间特征(如位置信息)在认知理论的特殊性存在争议。因此在工作记忆移除信息的视角下考察空间特征是否特殊具有理论必要性。为回答上述问题, 本文直接对比工作记忆中空间特征与非空间特征的移除, 并提出两个假设：空间特征相比非空间特征更难移除(位置特异假设)或二者移除难度相当(位置非特异假设)。实验中被试需记忆一个多特征客体(包含空间和非空间信息), 保持阶段根据线索提示移除任务无关特征, 仅保留任务相关特征, 检测阶段操纵任务无关信息的变化。核心逻辑在于若任务无关特征从工作记忆中有效移除, 则其在检测任务中发生变化不会影响任务相关特征的记忆绩效; 反之记忆绩效则会受影响。两实验结果一致显示, 相比非空间特征, 空间特征作为任务无关特征变化时对记忆绩效干扰更大。这表明, 空间位置比非空间特征更难从工作记忆中移除, 支持位置特异假设。

关键词: 工作记忆, 空间位置, 工作记忆移除

Abstract: Working memory (WM) is a limited-capacity system, its functioning relies heavily on the ability to remove no-longer-relevant information. While previous research has primarily focused on the removal of entire objects, it remains unclear whether all features within an object share a common fate during removal. In particular, given the privileged status of spatial location across various cognitive processes, it is an open question whether location information is treated differently during removal. To answer this question, we directly compared the removal of spatial and non-spatial features from WM. We proposed two competing hypotheses: The location-specific hypothesis assumed that spatial location was more difficult to remove from WM than non-spatial features, due to its central role in object representation. In contrast, the location-non-specific hypothesis assumed that spatial and non-spatial features share similar removal difficulties.
To test these hypotheses, we conducted two experiments with 55 participants (N = 26 in Experiment 1; N = 29 in Experiment 2). We employed a newly developed paradigm combining retro-cue with a change-detection task. On each trial, participants memorized a single object defined by multiple features (e.g., color and location). After a 500-ms delay, a retro-cue indicated the task-relevant feature, and participants were explicitly instructed to remove the uncued feature from WM. Following a 1000-ms delay, a probe appeared, and participants judged whether the cued feature had changed. Crucially, the uncued (task-irrelevant) feature changed in 50% of the trials, allowing us to quantify residual interference from information that should have been removed.
The critical measure was the interference effect, defined as the difference in reaction time (RTs) between trials with and without a change in the task-irrelevant feature. If removal is successful, changes in the task-irrelevant feature should produce little or no interference. In Experiment 1, we observed greater interference when spatial location was the task-irrelevant feature compared to when a non-spatial feature was irrelevant. This finding supports the location-specific hypothesis. However, because different feature types were tested under separate task conditions, it remained possible that the observed difference reflected task-related confounds (e.g., differing task difficulty). To address this concern, we conducted experiment 2, which tested spatial and non-spatial features within a unified task structure, eliminating between-condition differences. The results replicated those of Experiment 1: changes to task-irrelevant locations produced reliable interference, whereas changes to task-irrelevant non-spatial features did not.
Across both experiments, we found consistent evidence that spatial location is more difficult to remove from WM than non-spatial features. This finding supports location-specific hypothesis. Taken together, our study supported the privileged status of spatial location in WM removal.

Key words: working memory, spatial location, working memory removal

任国防, 丁晓伟, 张颖超, 王盛元. (2026). 空间位置比非空间特征更难从工作记忆中移除. 心理学报, 58(6), 1028-1041.

REN Guofang, DING Xiaowei, ZHANG Yingchao, WANG Shengyuan. (2026). Spatial location is harder to remove from working memory than non-spatial features. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 58(6), 1028-1041.

参考文献

[1] Al Hadhrami S. S., Bartsch L. M., & Oberauer K. (2025). A multinomial model-based analysis of bindings in working memory. Psychological Review, 132(4), 828-856. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000540
[2] Baddeley, A. (2012). Working memory: Theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100422
[3] Bays, P. M. (2014). Noise in neural populations accounts for errors in working memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 34(10), 3632-3645. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3204-13.2014
[4] Brainard, D. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 433-436. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897X00357
[5] Chen, H., & Wyble, B. (2015). The location but not the attributes of visual cues are automatically encoded into working memory. Vision Research, 107, 76-85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.11.010
[6] Chen W., Ye S., Ding X., Shen M., & Gao Z. (2024). Selectively maintaining an object's feature in visual working memory: A comparison between highly discriminable and fine-grained features. Memory & Cognition, 53, 853-868. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01612-w
[7] Chun, M. M., & Jiang, Y. (1998). Contextual cueing: Implicit learning and memory of visual context guides spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 36(1), 28-71. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0681
[8] Foster J. J., Bsales E. M., Jaffe R. J.,& Awh, E.(2017). Alpha-band activity reveals spontaneous representations of spatial position in visual working memory. Current Biology, 272017.09.031
[9] Fougnie D., Cormiea S. M., & Alvarez G. A. (2013). Object-based benefits without object based representations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(3), 621-626. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030300
[10] Gao T., Gao Z., Li J., Sun Z., & Shen M. (2011). The perceptual root of object-based storage: An interactive model of perception and visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(6), 1803-1823. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025637
[11] Gao Z., Li J., Liang J., Chen H., Yin J., & Shen M. (2009). Storing fine detailed information in visual working memory—Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Vision, 9(7), 17. https://doi.org/10.1167/9.7.17
[12] Gao Z., Yu S., Zhu C., Shui R., Weng X., Li P., & Shen M. (2016). Object-based encoding in visual working memory: Evidence from memory-driven attentional capture. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 22822. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep22822
[13] Green, E. J., & Quilty-Dunn, J. (2021). What is an object file? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 73(3), 665-699. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axx055
[14] Groen I. I., Dekker T. M., Knapen T.,& Silson, E. H.(2022). Visuospatial coding as ubiquitous scaffolding for human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 262021.10.011
[15] Hollingworth, A., & Rasmussen, I. P. (2010). Binding objects to locations: The relationship between object files and visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36(3), 543-564. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017836
[16] Huang, L. (2010). What is the unit of visual attention? Object for selection, but Boolean map for access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(1), 162-179. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018034
[17] Huang, L. (2020). Unit of visual working memory: A Boolean map provides a better account than an object does. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000616
[18] Huang, L., & Pashler, H. (2007). A Boolean map theory of visual attention. Psychological review, 114(3), 599-631. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.3.599
[19] Johnston, W. A., & Dark, V. J. (1986). Selective attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 37(1), 43-75. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.37.020186.000355
[20] Kahneman D., Treisman A., & Gibbs B. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90007-O
[21] Kim H., Smolker H. R., Smith L. L., Banich M. T., & Lewis-Peacock J. A. (2020). Changes to information in working memory depend on distinct removal operations. Nature Communications, 11(1), 6239. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-20085-4
[22] Kleiner M., Brainard D., & Pelli D., Ingling A., Murray R., & Broussard C. (2007). What's new in Psychtoolbox-3? Perception, 36, 1-16.
[23] Kong, G., & Fougnie, D. (2022). How selection in the mind is different from attention to the world. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(3), 542-554. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/xge0001098
[24] Kovacs, O., & Harris, I. M. (2019). The role of location in visual feature binding. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 81(5), 1551-1563. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-018-01638-8
[25] Li, Q., & Saiki, J. (2015). Different effects of color-based and location-based selection on visual working memory. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 450-463. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-014-0775-3
[26] Logie R. H., Brockmole J. R., & Jaswal S. (2011). Feature binding in visual short-term memory is unaffected by task-irrelevant changes of location, shape, and color. Memory & Cognition, 39, 24-36. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-010-0001-z
[27] Lara, A. H., & Wallis, J. D. (2014). Executive control processes underlying multi-item working memory. Nature neuroscience, 17(6), 876-883. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3702
[28] Luck, S. J., & Hillyard, S. A. (1994). Spatial filtering during visual search: evidence from human electrophysiology. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(5), 1000-1014. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.5.1000
[29] Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279-281. https://doi.org/10.1038/36846
[30] Ma W. J., Husain M., & Bays P. M. (2014). Changing concepts of working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 17(3), 347-356. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3655
[31] Oberauer K., Farrell S., Jarrold C., & Lewandowsky S. (2016). What limits working memory capacity? Psychological Bulletin, 142(7), 758-799. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000046
[32] Park Y. E., Sy J. L., Hong S. W., & Tong F. (2017). Reprioritization of features of multidimensional objects stored in visual working memory. Psychological Science, 28(12), 1773-1785. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617719949
[33] Posner, M. I., & Petersen, S. E. (1990). The attention system of the human brain. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 13(1), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ne.13.030190.000325
[34] Richard F. D., Bond C. F., Jr., & Stokes-Zoota J. J. (2003). One hundred years of social psychology: Quantitative synthesis of 2,500 articles. Review of General Psychology, 7(4), 331-363. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.7.4.331
[35] Sasin, E., & Fougnie, D. (2020). Memory-driven capture occurs for individual features of an object. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 19499. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-76431-5
[36] Schneegans, S., & Bays, P. M. (2017). Neural Architecture for Feature Binding in Visual Working Memory. The Journal of Neuroscience, 37(14), 3913-3925. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3493-16.2017
[37] Schneegans S., McMaster J., & Bays P. M. (2022). Role of time in binding features in visual working memory. Psychological Review, 130(1), 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000331
[38] Shen M., Tang N., Wu F., Shui R., & Gao Z. (2013). Robust object-based encoding in visual working memory. Journal of Vision, 13(2), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1167/13.2.1
[39] Souza A. S., Rerko L., & Oberauer K. (2016). Getting more from visual working memory: Retro-cues enhance retrieval and protect from visual interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(6), 890-910. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000192
[40] Tam, J., & Wyble, B. (2023). Location has a privilege, but it is limited: Evidence from probing task-irrelevant location. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 49(7), 1051-1067. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001147
[41] Treisman, A., & Zhang, W. (2006). Location and binding in visual working memory. Memory & Cognition, 34(8), 1704-1719. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195932
[42] Westfall, J. (2015). PANGEA: Power analysis for general ANOVA designs. Unpublished manuscript. Available at http://jakewestfall.org/publications/pangea. pdf
[43] Williams M., Hong S. W., Kang M. S., Carlisle N. B., & Woodman G. F. (2013). The benefit of forgetting. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 348-355. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0354-3
[44] Wolfe, J. M., & Horowitz, T. S. (2004). What attributes guide the deployment of visual attention and how do they do it? Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(6), 495-501. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1411
[45] Woodman, G. F. (2021). Spatial location is filtered out of visual working memory representations when task irrelevant, just like other features. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(4), 1391-1396. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-021-02263-8
[46] Woodman G. F., Vogel E. K.,& Luck, S. J.(2012). Flexibility in visual working memory: Accurate change detection in the face of irrelevant variations in position. Visual Cognition, 202011.630694
[47] Yin J., Gao Z., Jin X., Ding X., Liang J.,& Shen, M.(2012). The neural mechanisms of percept-memory comparison in visual working memory. Biological Psychology, 902012.02.023
[48] Yin J., Zhou J., Xu H., Liang J., Gao Z., & Shen M. (2012). Does high memory load kick task irrelevant information out of visual working memory? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(2), 218-224. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0201-y