scholarly journals Independent storage of different features of real-world objects in long-term memory.

2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (3) ◽  
pp. 530-549 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor S. Utochkin ◽  
Timothy F. Brady
Heliyon ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (10) ◽  
pp. e05260
Author(s):  
David Bestue ◽  
Luis M. Martínez ◽  
Alex Gomez-Marin ◽  
Miguel A. Gea ◽  
Jordi Camí

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph M. Saito ◽  
Katherine Duncan ◽  
Keisuke Fukuda

Maintaining perceptual experiences in visual working memory (VWM) allows us to flexibly accomplish various tasks, but some tasks come at a price. For example, comparing VWM representations to novel perceptual inputs can induce inadvertent memory distortions. If these distortions persist, they may explain why everyday memories often become unreliable after people perform perceptual comparisons (e.g., eyewitness testimony). Here, we conducted two experiments to assess the consequences of perceptual comparisons using real-world objects that were temporarily maintained in VWM (n = 32) or recalled from long-term memory back into VWM (n = 30). In each experiment, young adults reported systematic memory distortions following perceptual comparisons. These distortions increased in magnitude with the delay between encoding and comparisons and were preserved when memories were retrieved again a day later. These findings suggest that perceptual comparisons play a mechanistic role in everyday memory distortions, including situations where memory accuracy is vital.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy F. Brady ◽  
Viola S. Störmer ◽  
George Alvarez

Visual working memory is the cognitive system that holds visual information active to make it resistant to interference from new perceptual input. Information about simple stimuli – colors, orientations – is encoded into working memory rapidly: in under 100ms, working memory ‘fills up’, revealing a stark capacity limit. However, for real-world objects, the same behavioral limits do not hold: with increasing encoding time, people store more real-world objects and do so with more detail. This boost in performance for real-world objects is generally assumed to reflect the use of a separate episodic long-term memory system, rather than working memory. Here we show that this behavioral increase in capacity with real-world objects is not solely due to the use of separate episodic long-term memory systems. In particular, we show that this increase is a result of active storage in working memory, as shown by directly measuring neural activity during the delay period of a working memory task using EEG. These data challenge fixed capacity working memory models, and demonstrate that working memory and its capacity limitations are dependent upon our existing knowledge.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Utochkin ◽  
Timothy F. Brady

People can store thousands of real-world objects in visual long-term memory with high precision. But are these objects stored as unitary, bound entities, as often assumed, or as bundles of separable features? We tested this in several experiments. In the first series of studies, participants were instructed to remember specific exemplars of real-world objects presented in a particular state (e.g., open/closed; full/empty; etc), and then were asked to recognize either which exemplars they had seen (e.g., I saw this coffee mug), or which exemplar-state conjunctions they had seen (e.g., I saw this coffee mug and it was full). Participants had a large number of within-category confusions, for example misremembering which states went with which exemplars, while simultaneously showing strong memory for the features themselves (e.g., which states they had seen; which exemplars they had seen). In a second series of studies, we found further evidence of independence: participants were very good at remembering which exemplars they had seen independently of whether these items were presented in a new or old state, but the same did not occur for features known to be truly holistically represented. Thus, we find through two lines of evidence that the features of real-world objects that support exemplar discrimination and state discrimination are not bound, suggesting visual objects are not inherently unitary entities in memory.


2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1289-1289 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Brady ◽  
T. Konkle ◽  
G. Alvarez ◽  
A. Oliva

2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (7) ◽  
pp. 1275-1293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Halely Balaban ◽  
Dana Assaf ◽  
Moran Arad Meir ◽  
Roy Luria

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document