How does the content of visual working memory influence the way we process the visual environment? We addressed this question using the steady-state visual evoked potential (SSVEP), which provides a discernible measure of visuocortical activation to multiple stimuli simultaneously. Fifty-six adults were asked to remember a set of two oriented gratings. During the retention interval, two frequency-tagged oriented gratings were presented to probe the visuocortical processing of matching versus mismatching orientations relative to the memory set. Matching probes prompted an increased visuocortical response, whereas mismatching stimuli were suppressed. This suggests that the visual cortex prioritizes attentional selection of memory-relevant features at the expense of non-memory-relevant features. When two memory items were probed simultaneously, visuocortical amplification alternated between the two stimuli at a rate of 3 Hz to 4 Hz, consistent with the rate of attentional sampling of sensory events from the external world. These results suggest a serial, single-item attentional sampling of remembered features.
AndersenS. K.MullerM. M.HillyardS. A. (2009). Color-selective attention need not be mediated by spatial attention. Journal of Vision, 9(6), Article 2. doi:10.1167/9.6.2
2.
BachM.MeigenT. (1999). Do’s and don’ts in Fourier analysis of steady-state potentials. Documenta Ophthalmologica, 99, 69–82.
3.
BridwellD. A.SrinivasanR. (2012). Distinct attention networks for feature enhancement and suppression in vision. Psychological Science, 23, 1151–1158. doi:10.1177/0956797612440099
4.
ChunM. M.JohnsonM. K. (2011). Memory: Enduring traces of perceptual and reflective attention. Neuron, 72, 520–535. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.10.026
5.
CowanN. (2017). Mental objects in working memory. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 52, 81–104. doi:10.1016/bs.acdb.2016.12.001
6.
Di RussoF.PitzalisS.AprileT.SpitoniG.PatriaF.StellaA.. . . HillyardS. A. (2007). Spatiotemporal analysis of the cortical sources of the steady-state visual evoked potential. Human Brain Mapping, 28, 323–334.
7.
FriesP. (2015). Rhythms for cognition: Communication through coherence. Neuron, 88, 220–235.
8.
GayetS.GuggenmosM.ChristophelT. B.HaynesJ.-D.PaffenC. L. E.der StigchelS. V.SterzerP. (2017). Visual working memory enhances the neural response to matching visual input. The Journal of Neuroscience, 37, 6638–6647. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3418-16.2017
9.
GrayM. J.FreyH.-P.WilsonT. J.FoxeJ. J. (2015). Oscillatory recruitment of bilateral visual cortex during spatial attention to competing rhythmic inputs. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 5489–5503. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2891-14.2015
10.
GroppeD. M.UrbachT. P.KutasM. (2011). Mass univariate analysis of event-related brain potentials/fields I: A critical tutorial review. Psychophysiology, 48, 1711–1725.
11.
HarrisonS. A.TongF. (2009). Decoding reveals the contents of visual working memory in early visual areas. Nature, 458, 632–635. doi:10.1038/nature07832
12.
HedgeC.OberauerK.LeonardsU. (2015). Selection in spatial working memory is independent of perceptual selective attention, but they interact in a shared spatial priority map. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 7, 2653–2668.
13.
HelfrichR. F.FiebelkornI. C.SzczepanskiS. M.LinJ. J.ParviziJ.KnightR. T.KastnerS. (2018). Neural mechanisms of sustained attention are rhythmic. Neuron, 99, 854–865.e5. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2018.07.032
14.
HollingworthA.BeckV. M. (2016). Memory-based attention capture when multiple items are maintained in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42, 911–917.
15.
LandauA. N.SchreyerH. M.van PeltS.FriesP. (2015). Distributed attention is implemented through theta-rhythmic gamma modulation. Current Biology, 25, 2332–2337.
16.
LorencE. S.SreenivasanK. K.NeeD. E.VandenbrouckeA. R. E.D’EspositoM. (2018). Flexible coding of visual working memory representations during distraction. The Journal of Neuroscience, 38, 5267–5276. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3061-17.2018
MangunG. R.HillyardS. A. (1990). Allocation of visual attention to spatial locations: Tradeoff functions for event-related brain potentials and detection performance. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 532–550. doi:10.3758/BF03203106
19.
MangunG. R.HillyardS. A. (1995). Mechanisms and models of selective attention. In RuggM. D.ColesM. G. H. (Eds.), Electrophysiology of mind: Event-related brain potentials and cognition (pp. 40–85). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
20.
MaunsellJ. H. R.TreueS. (2006). Feature-based attention in visual cortex. Trends in Neurosciences, 29, 317–322. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2006.04.001
21.
MendozaD.SchneidermanM.KaulC.Martinez-TrujilloJ. (2011). Combined effects of feature-based working memory and feature-based attention on the perception of visual motion direction. Journal of Vision, 11(1), Article 11. doi:10.1167/11.1.11
22.
MüllerM. M.AndersenS.TrujilloN. J.Valdes-SosaP.MalinowskiP.HillyardS. A. (2006). Feature-selective attention enhances color signals in early visual areas of the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103, 14250–14254.
23.
MyersN. E.StokesM. G.NobreA. C. (2017). Prioritizing information during working memory: Beyond sustained internal attention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21, 449–461.
24.
NolanH.WhelanR.ReillyR. B. (2010). FASTER: Fully Automated Statistical Thresholding for EEG artifact Rejection. Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 192, 152–162. doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2010.07.015
25.
NorciaA. M.AppelbaumL. G.AlesJ. M.CottereauB. R.RossionB. (2015). The steady-state visual evoked potential in vision research: A review. Journal of Vision, 15(6), Article 4. doi:10.1167/15.6.4
26.
OberauerK. (2003). Selective attention to elements in working memory. Experimental Psychology, 50, 257–269.
27.
OberauerK. (2009). Design for a working memory. In RossB. H. (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 51, pp. 45–100). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. doi:10.1016/S0079-7421(09)51002-X
28.
OberauerK.HeinL. (2012). Attention to information in working memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 164–169. doi:10.1177/0963721412444727
29.
OliversC. N. L.EimerM. (2011). On the difference between working memory and attentional set. Neuropsychologia, 49, 1553–1558. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.11.033
30.
OliversC. N. L.MeijerF.TheeuwesJ. (2006). Feature-based memory-driven attentional capture: Visual working memory content affects visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 1243–1265.
31.
OliversC. N. L.PetersJ.HoutkampR.RoelfsemaP. R. (2011). Different states in visual working memory: When it guides attention and when it does not. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 327–334. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2011.05.004
32.
PostleB. R. (2006). Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain. Neuroscience, 139, 23–28.
33.
RademakerR. L.van de VenV. G.TongF.SackA. T. (2017). The impact of early visual cortex transcranial magnetic stimulation on visual working memory precision and guess rate. PLOS ONE, 12(4), Article e0175230. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175230
34.
R Core Team. (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 2.15.2). Retrieved from http://www.r-project.org
35.
ReynoldsJ. H.HeegerD. J. (2009). The normalization model of attention. Neuron, 61, 168–185. doi:10.1016/J.Neuron.2009.01.002
36.
RouderJ. N.MoreyR. D.SpeckmanP. L.ProvinceJ. M. (2012). Default Bayes factors for ANOVA designs. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 56, 356–374.
37.
RouderJ. N.SpeckmanP. L.SunD.MoreyR. D.IversonG. (2009). Bayesian t tests for accepting and rejecting the null hypothesis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 225–237.
38.
SchroederC. E.WilsonD. A.RadmanT.ScharfmanH.LakatosP. (2010). Dynamics of active sensing and perceptual selection. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 20, 172–176.
39.
SerencesJ. T.EsterE. F.VogelE. K.AwhE. (2009). Stimulus-specific delay activity in human primary visual cortex. Psychological Science, 20, 207–214. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02276.x
40.
SotoD.HodsollJ.RotshteinP.HumphreysG. W. (2008). Automatic guidance of attention from working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12, 342–348. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2008.05.007
41.
SouzaA. S.OberauerK. (2016). In search of the focus of attention in working memory: 13 years of the retro-cue effect. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 78, 1839–1860. doi:10.3758/s13414-016-1108-5
42.
StörmerV. S.AlvarezG. A. (2014). Feature-based attention elicits surround suppression in feature space. Current Biology, 24, 1985–1988.
43.
van MoorselaarD.BattistoniE.TheeuwesJ.OliversC. N. L. (2015). Rapid influences of cued visual memories on attentional guidance. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1339, 1–10.
44.
van MoorselaarD.TheeuwesJ.OliversC. N. L. (2014). In competition for the attentional template: Can multiple items within visual working memory guide attention?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 1450–1464.
45.
VanRullenR. (2016). Perceptual cycles. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 723–735.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
