When visual stimuli remain present during search, people spend more time fixating objects that are semantically or visually related to the target instruction than looking at unrelated objects. Are these semantic and visual biases also observable when participants search within memory? We removed the visual display prior to search while continuously measuring eye movements towards locations previously occupied by objects. The target absent trials contained objects that were either visually or semantically related to the target instruction. When the overall mean proportion of fixation time was considered, we found biases towards the location previously occupied by the target, but failed to find biases towards visually or semantically related objects. However, in two experiments the pattern of biases towards the target over time provided a reliable predictor for biases towards the visually and semantically related objects. We therefore conclude that visual and semantic representations alone can guide eye movements in memory search, but that orienting biases are weak when the stimuli are no longer present. Visually perceiving an object invokes the activation of various types of representation, from its visual features such as shape and colour to the semantic category it belongs to. However, as our cognitive capacities are limited, not all objects can be processed at the same time, and we selectively attend to certain objects over others. An important question is therefore which types of representation are available for prioritizing certain objects.There is now substantial evidence that selection of visual objects is driven by both visual and semantic representations. Part of this evidence comes from the visual search task, in which people are instructed to search for a specific target item amongst other objects. A number of studies have shown that observers can select targets on the basis of both pictorial and word cues (e.g., Schmidt & Zelinsky, 2009Wolfe, Horowitz, Kenner, Hyle, & Vasan, 2004). Moores, Laiti, and Chelazzi (2003) investigated the influence of semantics more directly and found that objects that were semantically related to a verbal target instruction received more initial fixations than the other objects and slowed down responses on target absent trials (see also Meyer, Belke, Telling, & Humphreys, 2007;Telling, Kumar, Meyer, & Humphreys, 2010). Other evidence comes from the field of psycholinguistics, especially from the visual world paradigm. Here a visual display of multiple objects is presented before a spoken utterance. In the crucial displays, some objects in the display have a relationship with a specific word in the spoken utterance. Results show that people spend more time fixating related than unrelated objects, whether this relationship is semantic (e.g., Huettig & Altmann, 2005;Yee & Sedivy, 2006;Yee, Overton, & Thompson-Schill, 2009) or visual in nature (e.g., Dahan & Tanenhaus, 2005;Dunabeitia, Aviles, Afonso, Scheepers, & Carreiras, 2009;Huettig & Altmann, 2007;Huettig & Altma...