Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference
Multiple high-reward items can be prioritized in working memory but with greater vulnerability to interference
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/s13414-018-1543-6
复制
发表时间：
2018-10-01
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Ueno, Taiji
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Allen, Richard J.;Ueno, Taiji
新兴的文献表明，工作记忆和注意力相互作用，以确定什么是保留随着时间的推移，虽然这种关系的性质和跨不同的任务环境对性能的影响仍有待映射。在本研究中，四个实验研究了参与者是否可以优先考虑一个或多个高回报的项目在一个四项目的目标阵列的目的，立即线索回忆任务，在何种程度上，这介导的破坏性影响postdisplay被忽略的后缀。所有四个实验都表明，内源性的注意力方向对高回报的项目的结果，在他们的回忆改善。此外，将高奖励项目的数量从1增加到3（实验1-3）不会导致这些项目的回忆性能下降，而将数组中的每个项目与不同的奖励值相关联会导致相应的回忆性能等级（实验4）。这些结果表明，在多个目标的优先级施加精确的自愿控制的能力。然而，根据最近的结果从串行视觉记忆，这种内源性驱动的重点高回报项目的结果更容易受到外源性后缀干扰，相对于低回报项目。这与线索范式的结果形成对比，表明不同的注意方向方法可能并不总是导致工作记忆表现的等同结果。
Emerging literature indicates that working memory and attention interact in determining what is retained over time, though the nature of this relationship and the impacts on performance across different task contexts remain to be mapped. In the present study, four experiments examined whether participants can prioritize one or more high-reward items within a four-item target array for the purposes of an immediate cued recall task, and the extent to which this mediates the disruptive impact of a postdisplay to-be-ignored suffix. All four experiments indicated that endogenous direction of attention toward high-reward items results in their improved recall. Furthermore, increasing the number of high-reward items from one to three (Experiments 1-3) produces no decline in recall performance for those items, while associating each item in an array with a different reward value results in correspondingly graded levels of recall performance (Experiment 4). These results suggest the ability to exert precise voluntary control in the prioritization of multiple targets. However, in line with recent outcomes drawn from serial visual memory, this endogenously driven focus on high-reward items results in greater susceptibility to exogenous suffix interference, relative to low-reward items. This contrasts with outcomes from cueing paradigms, indicating that different methods of attentional direction may not always result in equivalent outcomes on working memory performance.