Fragile visual short-term memory is an object-based and location-specific store

Abstract

Fragile visual short-term memory (FM) is a recently discovered form of visual short-term memory. Evidence suggests that it provides rich and high-capacity storage, like iconic memory, yet it exists, without interference, almost as long as visual working memory. In the present study, we sought to unveil the functional underpinnings of this memory storage. We found that FM is only completely erased when the new visual scene appears at the same location and consists of the same objects as the to-be-recalled information. This result has two important implications: First, it shows that FM is an object- and location-specific store, and second, it suggests that FM might be used in everyday life when the presentation of visual information is appropriately designed.

In search of the focus of attention in working memory: 13 years of the retro-cue effect

“…4 Some studies have also assessed how long it takes to achieve a stable retro-cue benefit by varying the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between the offset of the retro-cue and presentation of a visual mask (Pinto, Sligte, Shapiro, & Lamme, 2013;van Moorselaar, Gunseli, et al, 2015). The visual mask diminished the retrocue benefit with SOAs up to 300 ms, further supporting this interval as the time needed to observe the full retro-cue benefit.…”

“…The evidence for this strong prediction is currently mixed. Sligte et al (2008) and Pinto et al (2013) observed that presenting a visual mask consisting of similar items in the same location as the memoranda prior to onset of the retro-cue abolished the retro-cue benefit. In contrast, Makovski (2012) observed retro-cue benefits even when a visual mask (multicolored dots presented at the same location as the color memoranda) was displayed prior to the retro-cue.…”

“…These fragile representations are highly susceptible to interference from visual input presented at the same location and in the same feature dimension as the memoranda (Pinto et al, 2013;Sligte et al, 2008). Hence, a probe presented in the same location as the target-as in local-recognition or change discrimination tasks-erases any fragile representation of the target, so that performance can only rely on the contents of the robust WM store.…”

“…The explanation is to a large part a version of H6: Retrocued items are encoded in robust WM, and are thereby protected against interference from subsequent visual input. Unlike our general formulation of H6, which assumes that perceptual interference can arise from a broad range of sources, the multiple-store theory is committed to the assumption that only perceptual input in the same location as the memory items disrupts the fragile representations of these items (Pinto et al, 2013;Sligte et al, 2008). Therefore, the multiple-store theory in its current form cannot easily explain the retro-cue benefit in the delayed-estimation paradigm, in which no probe is presented at the location of the target.…”

Theories and methods in the scientific study of consciousness

“…In the absence of subsequent stimulation, the rich information in iconic memory transfers to a fragile but rich form of longer lasting (seconds) memory from which attention can select a number of objects and features that far surpasses the classic capacity of working memory (Landman, Spekreijse, & Lamme, 2003;Sligte, Scholte, & Lamme, 2008;Sligte, Wokke, Tesselaar, Scholte, & Lamme, 2010;Vandenbroucke, Sligte, & Lamme, 2011). This fragile shortterm memory is however erased by new visual stimulation (Pinto, Sligte, Shapiro, & Lamme, 2013;Sligte, Scholte, & Lamme, 2009), leaving an observer with only the content of working memory from which to report. The attention-gated promotion of elements of a weak but rich visual representation to cognitive report systems strongly resembles the theoretical construct of the attention-gated transition from phenomenal to access consciousness making these memory paradigms an interesting approach to sample the mechanisms of visual consciousness (Crick & Koch, 1990;Kouider, de Gardelle, Sackur, & Dupoux, 2010;Lamme, 2010).…”