↓ Skip to main content

Similarity-based distortion of visual short-term memory is due to perceptual averaging

Overview of attention for article published in Vision Research, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
84 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Similarity-based distortion of visual short-term memory is due to perceptual averaging
Published in
Vision Research, January 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.visres.2013.12.016
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

A task-irrelevant stimulus can distort recall from visual short-term memory (VSTM). Specifically, reproduction of a task-relevant memory item is biased in the direction of the irrelevant memory item (Huang & Sekuler, 2010a). The present study addresses the hypothesis that such effects reflect the influence of neural averaging under conditions of uncertainty about the contents of VSTM (Alvarez, 2011; Ball & Sekuler, 1980). We manipulated subjects' attention to relevant and irrelevant study items whose similarity relationships were held constant, while varying how similar the study items were to a subsequent recognition probe. On each trial, subjects were shown one or two Gabor patches, followed by the probe; their task was to indicate whether the probe matched one of the study items. A brief cue told subjects which Gabor, first or second, would serve as that trial's target item. Critically, this cue appeared either before, between, or after the study items. A distributional analysis of the resulting mnemometric functions showed an inflation in probability density in the region spanning the spatial frequency of the average of the two memory items. This effect, due to an elevation in false alarms to probes matching the perceptual average, was diminished when cues were presented before both study items. These results suggest that (a) perceptual averages are computed obligatorily and (b) perceptual averages are relied upon to a greater extent when item representations are weakened. Implications of these results for theories of VSTM are discussed.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Poland 1 1%
Iceland 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 80 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 21%
Researcher 16 19%
Student > Master 13 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 5 6%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 48 57%
Neuroscience 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Computer Science 3 4%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 16 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 January 2014.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Vision Research
#2,209
of 2,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,094
of 319,134 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Vision Research
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,497 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,134 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.