The contents of visual working memory reduce uncertainty during visual search

Information held in visual working memory (VWM) influences the allocation of attention during visual search, with targets matching the contents of VWM receiving processing benefits over those that do not. Such an effect could arise from multiple mechanisms: First, it is possible that the contents of working memory enhance the perceptual representation of the target. Alternatively, it is possible that when a target is presented among distractor items, the contents of working memory operate postperceptually to reduce uncertainty about the location of the target. In both cases, a match between the contents of VWM and the target should lead to facilitated processing. However, each effect makes distinct predictions regarding set-size manipulations; whereas perceptual enhancement accounts predict processing benefits regardless of set size, uncertainty reduction accounts predict benefits only with set sizes larger than 1, when there is uncertainty regarding the target location. In the present study, in which briefly presented, masked targets were presented in isolation, there was a negligible effect of the information held in VWM on target discrimination. However, in displays containing multiple masked items, information held in VWM strongly affected target discrimination. These results argue that working memory representations act at a postperceptual level to reduce uncertainty during visual search.     

Visual memory and visual perception: when memory improves visual search

This study examined the relationship between memory and perception in order to identify the influence of a memory dimension in perceptual processing. Our aim was to determine whether the variation of typical size between items (i.e., the size in real life) affects visual search. In two experiments, the congruency between typical size difference and perceptual size difference was manipulated in a visual search task. We observed that congruency between the typical and perceptual size differences decreased reaction times in the visual search (Exp. 1), and noncongruency between these two differences increased reaction times in the visual search (Exp. 2). We argue that these results highlight that memory and perception share some resources and reveal the intervention of typical size difference on the computation of the perceptual size difference.     

Spatial and nonspatial working memory and visual search

It has been indicated that visual search is interfered with in spatial working memory (WM), although not in nonspatial WM. In this study, the effects on visual search of individual differences in spatial and nonspatial WM were examined. Two visual search conditions were used: a conjunction search condition comprising two features (color and shape) and a disjunction condition comprising only one feature (color or shape). 96 participants (42 men, 54 women, M age = 20.9 yr., SD = 3.5) participated in this study. The participants were divided into high and low WM groups based on their spatial and nonspatial WM test scores. As a result, statistically significant group differences in the conjunction search rate were observed in spatial WM but not in nonspatial WM. These results suggest there is a relationship between visual search and the individual spatial WM ability, but this does not hold for nonspatial WM.     

Visual working memory for simple and complex visual stimuli

Does the magical number four characterize our visual working memory (VWM) capacity for all kinds of objects, or is the capacity of VWM inversely related to the perceptual complexity of those objects? To find out how perceptual complexity affects VWM, we used a change detection task to measure VWM capacity for six types of stimuli of different complexity: colors, letters, polygons, squiggles, cubes, and faces. We found that the estimated capacity decreased for more complex stimuli, suggesting that perceptual complexity was an important factor in determining VWM capacity. However, the considerable correlation between perceptual complexity and VWM capacity declined significantly if subjects were allowed to view the sample memory display longer. We conclude that when encoding limitations are minimized, perceptual complexity affects, but does not determine, VWM capacity.     

Visual working memory supports the inhibition of previously processed information: evidence from preview search

In four experiments we assessed whether visual working memory (VWM) maintains a record of previously processed visual information, allowing old information to be inhibited, and new information to be prioritized. Specifically, we evaluated whether VWM contributes to the inhibition (i.e., visual marking) of previewed distractors in a preview search. We evaluated this proposal by testing three predictions. First, Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrate that preview inhibition is more effective when the number of previewed distractors is below VWM capacity than above; an effect that can only be observed at small preview set sizes (Experiment 2A) and when observers are allowed to move their eyes freely (Experiment 2B). Second, Experiment 3 shows that, when quantified as the number of inhibited distractors, the magnitude of the preview effect is stable across different search difficulties. Third, Experiment 4 demonstrates that individual differences in preview inhibition are correlated with individual differences in VWM capacity. These findings provide converging evidence that VWM supports the inhibition of previewed distractors. More generally, these findings demonstrate how VWM contributes to the efficiency of human visual information processing--VWM prioritizes new information by inhibiting old information from being reselected for attention.     

Visual search does not remain efficient when executive working memory is working

Working memory (WM) has been thought to include not only short-term memory stores but also executive processes that operate on the contents of memory. The present study examined the involvement of WM in search using a dual-task paradigm in which participants performed visual search while manipulating or simply maintaining information held in WM. Experiments 1a and 2a involved executive WM tasks that required counting backward from a target digit and sorting a string of letters alphabetically, respectively. In both experiments, the search slopes in the dual-task condition were significantly steeper than those in a search-alone condition, indicating that performing the WM manipulation tasks influenced the efficiency of visual search. In contrast, when information was simply maintained in WM (Experiments 1b and 2b), search slopes did not differ between the single- and dual-task conditions. These results suggest that WM resources related to executive functions may be required in visual search.     

Selective working memory disables inhibition of visual features

Recent research suggests that information held in working memory can facilitate subsequent attentional processing. Here, we explore the negative corollary of this conception: Under which circumstances does information in working memory disrupt subsequent processing? Seventy participants performed visual discriminations in a dual-task paradigm. They were asked to judge colors or shapes in an online attention task under three different working-memory conditions: Same, Switch, or Unknown. In the Same condition, participants selectively maintained one visual feature in working memory, from the same dimension as in the online attention task. In the Switch condition, participants selectively maintained one visual feature in working memory, but had to focus on another visual dimension in the online attention task. In the Unknown condition, participants could not predict which visual feature would be relevant for the working-memory task. We found that irrelevant features in the online attention task were particularly difficult to ignore in the Switch condition, that is, when the irrelevant features belong to a visual dimension that is simultaneously prioritized in selective working memory. The findings are consistent with accounts in terms of neural overlap between working-memory and attention circuits, and suggest that mechanisms of selection, rather than resource limitations, critically determine the extent of visual interference.     

Strategic and automatic effects of visual working memory on attention in visual search

Previous research indicates that visual attention can be automatically captured by sensory inputs that match the contents of visual working memory. However, Woodman and Luck (2007) showed that information in working memory can be used flexibly as a template for either selection or rejection according to task demands. We report two experiments that extend their work. Participants performed a visual search task while maintaining items in visual working memory. Memory items were presented for either a short or long exposure duration immediately prior to the search task. Memory was tested by a change-detection task immediately afterwards. On a random half of trials items in memory matched either one distractor in the search task (Experiment 1) or three (Experiment 2). The main result was that matching distractors speeded or slowed target detection depending on whether memory items were presented for a long or short duration. These effects were more in evidence with three matching distractors than one. We conclude that the influence of visual working memory on visual search is indeed flexible but is not solely a function of task demands. Our results suggest that attentional capture by perceptual inputs matching information in visual working memory involves a fast automatic process that can be overridden by a slower top-down process of attentional avoidance.     

Visual search is slowed when visuospatial working memory is occupied

Visual working memory plays a central role in most models of visual search. However, a recent study showed that search efficiency was not impaired when working memory was filled to capacity by a concurrent object memory task (Woodman, Vogel, & Luck, 2001). Objects and locations may be stored in separate working memory subsystems, and it is plausible that visual search relies on the spatial subsystem, but not on the object subsystem. In the present study, we sought to determine whether maintaining spatial information in visual working memory impairs the efficiency of a concurrent visual search task. Visual search efficiency and spatial memory accuracy were both impaired when the search and the memory tasks were performed concurrently, as compared with when the tasks were performed separately. These findings suggest that common mechanisms are used to process information during difficult visual search tasks and to maintain spatial information in working memory.     

The role of spatial working memory in visual search efficiency

Many theories have proposed that visual working memory plays an important role in visual search. In contrast, by showing that a nonspatial working memory load did not interfere with search efficiency, Woodman, Vogel, and Luck (2001) recently proposed that the role of working memory in visual search is insignificant. However, the visual search process may interfere with spatial working memory. In the present study, a visual search task was performed concurrently with either a spatial working memory task (Experiment 1) or a nonspatial working memory task (Experiment 2). We found that the visual search process interfered with a spatial working memory load, but not with a nonspatial working memory load. These results suggest that there is a distinction between spatial and nonspatial working memory in terms of interactions with visual search tasks. These results imply that the visual search process and spatial working memory storage require the same limited-capacity mechanisms.     

Searching while loaded: Visual working memory does not interfere with hybrid search efficiency but hybrid search uses working memory capacity

In “hybrid search” tasks, such as finding items on a grocery list, one must search the scene for targets while also searching the list in memory. How is the representation of a visual item compared with the representations of items in the memory set? Predominant theories would propose a role for visual working memory (VWM) either as the site of the comparison or as a conduit between visual and memory systems. In seven experiments, we loaded VWM in different ways and found little or no effect on hybrid search performance. However, the presence of a hybrid search task did reduce the measured capacity of VWM by a constant amount regardless of the size of the memory or visual sets. These data are broadly consistent with an account in which VWM must dedicate a fixed amount of its capacity to passing visual representations to long-term memory for comparison to the items in the memory set. The data cast doubt on models in which the search template resides in VWM or where memory set item representations are moved from LTM through VWM to earlier areas for comparison to visual items.     

Visual search has memory

By monitoring subjects' eye movements during a visual search task, we examined the possibility that the mechanism responsible for guiding attention during visual search has no memory for which locations have already been examined. Subjects did reexamine some items during their search, but the pattern of revisitations did not fit the predictions of the memoryless search model. In addition, a large proportion of the refixations were directed at the target, suggesting that the revisitations were due to subjects' remembering which items had not been adequately identified. We also examined the patterns of fixations and compared them with the predictions of a memoryless search model. Subjects' fixation patterns showed an increasing hazard function, whereas the memoryless model predicts a flat function. Lastly, we found no evidence suggesting that fixations were guided by amnesic covert scans that scouted the environment for new items during fixations. Results do not support the claims of the memoryless search model, and instead suggest that visual search does have memory.     

Different states in visual working memory: when it guides attention and when it does not

Recent studies have revealed a strong relationship between visual working memory and selective attention, such that attention is biased by what is currently on our mind. However, other data show that not all memorized items influence the deployment of attention, thus calling for a distinction within working memory: whereas active memory items function as an attentional template and directly affect perception, other, accessory items do not. We review recent evidence that items compete for the status of 'attentional template' that contains only one object at a time. Neurophysiological results provide insight into these different memory states by revealing a more intricate organization of working memory than was previously thought.     

The effect of items in working memory on the deployment of attention and the eyes during visual search

Paying attention to an object facilitates its storage in working memory. The authors investigate whether the opposite is also true: whether items in working memory influence the deployment of attention. Participants performed a search for a prespecified target while they held another item in working memory. In some trials this memory item was present in the search display as a distractor. Such a distractor has no effect on search time if the search target is in the display. In that case, the item in working memory is unlikely to be selected as a target for an eye movement, and if the eyes do land on it, fixation duration is short. In the absence of the target, however, there is a small but significant effect of the memory item on search time. The authors conclude that the target for visual search has a special status in working memory that allows it to guide attention. Guidance of attention by other items in working memory is much weaker and can be observed only if the search target is not present in the display.     

Tuning perception: Visual working memory biases the quality of visual awareness

Studies of consciousness reveal that it is possible to manipulate subjective awareness of a visual stimulus. For example, items held in visual working memory (VWM) that match target features increase the speed with which the target reaches visual awareness. To examine the effect of VWM on perception, previous studies have mainly used coarse measures of awareness, such as present/absent or forced-choice judgments. These methods can reveal whether or not an individual has seen an item, but they do not provide information about the quality with which the item was seen. Using continuous report methods it has been shown that the fidelity of a perceived item can be affected by whether or not that item is masked. In the present study, we used an object-substitution masking task to examine whether items held in VWM would influence the quality with which a masked target reached awareness, or whether the threshold for awareness was instead affected by stimuli held in memory. We observed that targets matching the contents of VWM were recalled with greater precision compared to items that did not match the contents of VWM. Importantly, this effect occurred without affecting the likelihood of the target being perceived. These results suggest that VWM plays a greater role in modulating the fidelity of perceived representations than in lowering the overall threshold of awareness.     

Visual working memory contaminates perception

Indirect evidence suggests that the contents of visual working memory may be maintained within sensory areas early in the visual hierarchy. We tested this possibility using a well-studied motion repulsion phenomenon in which perception of one direction of motion is distorted when another direction of motion is viewed simultaneously. We found that observers misperceived the actual direction of motion of a single motion stimulus if, while viewing that stimulus, they were holding a different motion direction in visual working memory. Control experiments showed that none of a variety of alternative explanations could account for this repulsion effect induced by working memory. Our findings provide compelling evidence that visual working memory representations directly interact with the same neural mechanisms as those involved in processing basic sensory events.