Past work has shown that storage in working memory elicits stimulus-specific neural activity that tracks the stored content. Here, we present evidence for a distinct class of load-sensitive neural activity that indexes items without representing their contents per se. We recorded electroencephalogram (EEG) activity while adult human subjects stored varying numbers of items in visual working memory. Multivariate analysis of the scalp topography of EEG voltage enabled precise tracking of the number of individuated items stored and robustly predicted individual differences in working memory capacity. Critically, this signature of working memory load generalized across variations in both the type and number of visual features stored about each item, suggesting that it tracked the number of individuated memory representations and not the content of those memories. We hypothesize that these findings reflect the operation of a capacity-limited pointer system that supports on-line storage and attentive tracking.
AdamK. C. S.ManceI.FukudaK.VogelE. K. (2015). The contribution of attentional lapses to individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27(8), 1601–1616.
2.
AdamK. C. S.VogelE. K.AwhE. (2020). Multivariate analysis reveals a generalizable human electrophysiological signature of working memory load. Psychophysiology, 57(12), Article e13691.
3.
AwhE.BartonB.VogelE. K. (2007). Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science, 18(7), 622–628.
4.
AwhE.JonidesJ. (2001). Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(3), 119–126.
5.
BalabanH.DrewT.LuriaR. (2019). Neural evidence for an object-based pointer system underlying working memory. Cortex, 119, 362–372.
6.
BaysP. M. (2018). Reassessing the evidence for capacity limits in neural signals related to working memory. Cerebral Cortex, 28(4), 1432–1438.
7.
BouchacourtF.BuschmanT. J. (2019). A flexible model of working memory. Neuron, 103(1), 147–160.
8.
CarlisleN. B.WoodmanG. F. (2011). Automatic and strategic effects in the guidance of attention by working memory representations. Acta psychologica, 137(2), 217–225.
9.
ChunM. M. (2011). Visual working memory as visual attention sustained internally over time. Neuropsychologia, 49(6), 1407–1409.
10.
D’EspositoM.PostleB. R. (2015). The cognitive neuroscience of working memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 115–142.
11.
DiazG. K.VogelE. K.AwhE. (2021). Perceptual grouping reveals distinct roles for sustained slow wave activity and alpha oscillations in working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 33(7), 1354–1364.
12.
DrewT.VogelE. K. (2008). Neural measures of individual differences in selecting and tracking multiple moving objects. The Journal of Neuroscience, 28(16), 4183–4191.
13.
Feldmann-WüstefeldT. (2021). Neural measures of working memory in a bilateral change detection task. Psychophysiology, 58, Article e13683.
14.
FukudaK.ManceI.VogelE. K. (2015). α power modulation and event-related slow wave provide dissociable correlates of visual working memory. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(41), 14009–14016. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5003-14.2015
15.
FukudaK.VogelE.MayrU.AwhE. (2010). Quantity, not quality: The relationship between fluid intelligence and working memory capacity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(5), 673–679.
16.
FunahashiS.BruceC. J.Goldman-RakicP. S. (1989). Mnemonic coding of visual space in the monkey’s dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Journal of Neurophysiology, 61(2), 331–349.
17.
FusterJ. M.JerveyJ. P. (1981). Inferotemporal neurons distinguish and retain behaviorally relevant features of visual stimuli. Science, 212(4497), 952–955.
18.
Goldman-RakicP. S. (1995). Cellular basis of working memory. Neuron, 14(3), 477–485.
19.
GunseliE.MeeterM.OliversC. N. (2014). Is a search template an ordinary working memory? Comparing electrophysiological markers of working memory maintenance for visual search and recognition. Neuropsychologia, 60, 29–38.
20.
HakimN.AdamK. C.GunseliE.AwhE.VogelE. K. (2019). Dissecting the neural focus of attention reveals distinct processes for spatial attention and object-based storage in visual working memory. Psychological Science, 30(4), 526–540.
21.
HarrisonS. A.TongF. (2009). Decoding reveals the contents of visual working memory in early visual areas. Nature, 458(7238), 632–635. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07832
22.
KahnemanD.TreismanA.GibbsB. J. (1992). The reviewing of object files: Object-specific integration of information. Cognitive Psychology, 24(2), 175–219.
23.
KappenmanE. S.FarrensJ. L.ZhangW.StewartA. X.LuckS. J. (2021). ERP CORE: An open resource for human event-related potential research. NeuroImage, 225, 117465.
24.
Lopez-CalderonJ.LuckS. J. (2014). ERPLAB: An open-source toolbox for the analysis of event-related potentials. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, Article 213. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00213
25.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279–281.
26.
LuriaR.BalabanH.AwhE.VogelE. K. (2016). The contralateral delay activity as a neural measure of visual working memory. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 62, 100–108.
27.
McNabF.KlingbergT. (2008). Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nature Neuroscience, 11(1), 103–107.
28.
OberauerK. (2019). Working memory capacity limits memory for bindings. Journal of Cognition, 2(1), Article 40. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.86
29.
OlsonI. R.JiangY. (2002). Is visual short-term memory object based? Rejection of the “strong-object” hypothesis. Perception & Psychophysics, 64(7), 1055–1067.
30.
PedregosaF.VaroquauxG.GramfortA.MichelV.ThirionB.GriselO.BlondelM.PrettenhoferP.WeissR.DubourgV.VanderplasJ.PassosA.CournapeauD.BrucherM.PerrotM.DuchesnayÉ. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825–2830.
31.
Pedregosa-IzquierdoF. (2015). Feature extraction and supervised learning on fMRI: From practice to theory [Medical imaging] (NNT: 2015PA066015, tel-01100921v2). Université Pierre et Marie Curie–Paris VI.
32.
PeirceJ.GrayJ. R.SimpsonS.MacAskillM.HöchenbergerR.SogoH.KastmanE.LindeløvJ. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51, 195–203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y
33.
PooM. M.PignatelliM.RyanT. J.TonegawaS.BonhoefferT.MartinK. C.RudenkoA.TsaiL.-H.TsienR. W.FishellG.MullinsC.GonçalvesJ. T.ShtrahmanM.JohnstonS. T.GageF. H.DanY.LongJ.BuzsákiG.StevensC. (2016). What is memory? The present state of the engram. BMC Biology, 14(1), 1–18.
34.
PylyshynZ. W. (2009). Perception, representation, and the world: The FINST that binds. In DedrickD.TrickL. (Eds.), Computation, cognition, and Pylyshyn (pp. 3–48). MIT Press.
35.
PylyshynZ. W.StormR. W. (1988). Tracking multiple independent targets: Evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism. Spatial Vision, 3(3), 179–197.
36.
RademakerR. L.ChunharasC.SerencesJ. T. (2019). Coexisting representations of sensory and mnemonic information in human visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 22(8), 1336–1344.
37.
SerencesJ. T.EsterE. F.VogelE. K.AwhE. (2009). Stimulus-specific delay activity in human primary visual cortex. Psychological Science, 20(2), 207–214.
38.
SwanG.WybleB. (2014). The binding pool: A model of shared neural resources for distinct items in visual working memory. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(7), 2136–2157.
39.
ToddJ. J.MaroisR. (2004). Capacity limit of visual short-term memory in human posterior parietal cortex. Nature, 428(6984), 751–754.
40.
TsubomiH.FukudaK.WatanabeK.VogelE. K. (2013). Neural limits to representing objects still within view. The Journal of Neuroscience, 33(19), 8257–8263.
41.
UnsworthN.FukudaK.AwhE.VogelE. K. (2014). Working memory and fluid intelligence: Capacity, attention control, and secondary memory retrieval. Cognitive Psychology, 71, 1–26.
42.
UnsworthN.FukudaK.AwhE.VogelE. K. (2015). Working memory delay activity predicts individual differences in cognitive abilities. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27(5), 853–865.
43.
VogelE. K.MachizawaM. G. (2004). Neural activity predicts individual differences in visual working memory capacity. Nature, 428(6984), 748–751.
44.
VogelE. K.McColloughA. W.MachizawaM. G. (2005). Neural measures reveal individual differences in controlling access to working memory. Nature, 438(7067), 500–503.
45.
WoodmanG. F.VogelE. K. (2008). Selective storage and maintenance of an object’s features in visual working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(1), 223–229.
46.
XuY.ChunM. M. (2006). Dissociable neural mechanisms supporting visual short-term memory for objects. Nature, 440(7080), 91–95.
47.
XuY.ChunM. M. (2009). Selecting and perceiving multiple visual objects. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 167–174.
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.
