Visual working memory load does not eliminate visuomotor repetition effects

Abstract

When we respond to a stimulus, our ability to quickly execute this response depends on how combinations of stimulus and response features match to previous combinations of stimulus and response features. Some kind of memory representations must be underlying these visuomotor repetition effects. In this paper, we tested the hypothesis that visual working memory stores the stimulus information that gives rise to these effects. Participants discriminated the colors of successive stimuli while holding either three locations or colors in visual working memory. If visual working memory maintains the information about a previous event that leads to visuomotor repetition effects, then occupying working memory with colors or locations should selectively disrupt color-response and location-response repetition effects. The results of two experiments showed that neither color nor spatial memory load eliminated visuomotor repetition effects. Since working memory load did not disrupt repetition effects, it is unlikely that visual working memory resources are used to store the information that underlies visuomotor repetitions effects. Instead, these results are consistent with the view that visuomotor repetition effects stem from automatic long-term memory retrieval, but can also be accommodated by supposing separate buffers for visual working memory and response selection.

The Essential Role of Executive Attention in Unconscious Visuomotor Priming

“…Although our findings are inconsistent with those of Rajsic et al ( 2020 ) and Perea et al ( 2018 ), there were some differences between the experimental design of the present study and that of their work, which can account for the contradictory results. Most noteworthy, the simultaneous mental workload tasks in their paper were only related to the maintenance load, which did not include the central executive load.…”

“…According to the work of Tomasi et al ( 2007 ), executive attention load shares different and larger activation patterns than general attention load shares. Additionally, a visuomotor prime was presented visibly to the participants in the research of Rajsic et al ( 2020 ); therefore, their results cannot be simply compared to those of our study.…”

“…However, some studies observed neither the modulation of attentional load on subliminal priming (e.g., Perea et al, 2018 ) nor the modulation of attentional load on visuomotor priming (e.g., Rajsic et al, 2020 ). In these studies, participants completed a priming task while performing a memory maintenance task, and the concurrent resource demanding task did not interfere with the priming effect.…”

“…Different from maintenance processing, which temporarily stores verbal and visuospatial information, manipulation processing involves the online monitoring, updating, and manipulating of information; thus, the latter needs executive attention (Baddeley, 2012 ). Notably, previous studies claimed that visuomotor priming was not amenable to attention, and memory maintenance tasks instead of memory manipulation tasks were deployed (Perea et al, 2018 ; Rajsic et al, 2020 ). Although it is likely that subliminal priming or visuomotor priming is immune to attention, one possible reason for these results is that their experimental designs do not effectively manipulate the executive attention load, which might contribute to subliminal visuomotor priming (Ansorge et al, 2014 ).…”