↓ Skip to main content

Visual Working Memory Is Independent of the Cortical Spacing Between Memoranda

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroscience, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (53rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users

Readers on

mendeley
113 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
Visual Working Memory Is Independent of the Cortical Spacing Between Memoranda
Published in
Journal of Neuroscience, February 2018
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.2645-17.2017
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The sensory recruitment hypothesis states that visual short term memory is maintained in the same visual cortical areas that initially encode a stimulus' features. Although it is well established that the distance between features in visual cortex determines their visibility, a limitation known as crowding, it is unknown whether short term memory is similarly constrained by the cortical spacing of memory items. Here we investigated whether the cortical spacing between sequentially presented memoranda affects the fidelity of memory in humans (of both sexes). In a first experiment, we varied cortical spacing by taking advantage of the log-scaling of visual cortex with eccentricity, sequentially presenting memoranda in peripheral vision along either the radial or tangential visual axis with respect to the fovea. In a second experiment, we sequentially presented memoranda either within or beyond the critical spacing of visual crowding, a distance within which visual features cannot be perceptually distinguished due to their nearby cortical representations. In both experiments and across multiple measures, we found strong evidence that the ability to maintain visual features in memory is unaffected by cortical spacing. These results indicate that the neural architecture underpinning working memory has properties inconsistent with the known behaviour of sensory neurons in visual cortex. Instead, the dissociation between perceptual and memory representations supports a role of higher cortical areas, such as posterior parietal or prefrontal regions, or may involve an as yet unspecified mechanism in visual cortex in which stimulus features are bound to their temporal order.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTAlthough much is known about the resolution with which we can remember visual objects, the cortical representation of items held in short term memory remains contentious. A popular hypothesis suggests that memory of visual features is maintained via the recruitment of the same neural architecture in sensory cortex that encodes stimuli. We investigated this claim by manipulating the spacing in visual cortex between sequentially presented memoranda such that some items shared cortical representations more than others, while preventing perceptual interference between stimuli. We found clear evidence that short term memory is independent of the intra-cortical spacing of memoranda, revealing a dissociation between perceptual and memory representations. Our data indicate that working memory relies on different neural mechanisms from sensory perception.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users 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 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 113 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 24%
Researcher 21 19%
Student > Bachelor 19 17%
Student > Master 12 11%
Other 4 4%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 17 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 35%
Neuroscience 29 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 8%
Physics and Astronomy 2 2%
Social Sciences 2 2%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 23 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 06 July 2019.
All research outputs
#6,401,922
of 34,376,207 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#7,715
of 23,396 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,983
of 372,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#106
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,376,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,396 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
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 372,987 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.