↓ Skip to main content

Working memory management and predicted utility

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 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.
Title
Working memory management and predicted utility
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00083
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christopher H. Chatham, David Badre

Abstract

Given the limited capacity of working memory (WM), its resources should be allocated strategically. One strategy is filtering, whereby access to WM is granted preferentially to items with the greatest utility. However, reallocation of WM resources might be required if the utility of maintained information subsequently declines. Here, we present behavioral, computational, and neuroimaging evidence that human participants track changes in the predicted utility of information in WM. First, participants demonstrated behavioral costs when the utility of items already maintained in WM declined and resources should be reallocated. An adapted Q-learning model indicated that these costs scaled with the historical utility of individual items. Finally, model-based neuroimaging demonstrated that frontal cortex tracked the utility of items to be maintained in WM, whereas ventral striatum tracked changes in the utility of items maintained in WM to the degree that these items are no longer useful. Our findings suggest that frontostriatal mechanisms track the utility of information in WM, and that these dynamics may predict delays in the removal of information from WM.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
France 1 1%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 68 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 26%
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Professor 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 34 47%
Neuroscience 9 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 7%
Computer Science 4 6%
Engineering 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 9 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 26 July 2013.
All research outputs
#13,541,998
of 23,845,863 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,501
of 3,286 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,507
of 285,910 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#67
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,845,863 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,286 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 285,910 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 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 58% of its contemporaries.