Determining the manipulation unit of working memory is one of the fundamental questions in understanding how working memory functions. The prevalent object-based theory in cognitive research predicts that memory manipulation is performed on the level of objects. Here we show instead that the basic units of working memory manipulation are Boolean maps, a data structure describing what can be perceived in an instant. We developed four new manipulation tasks (with data from 80 adults) and showed that manipulation times only increased when the number of Boolean maps manipulated increased. Increasing the number of orientations manipulated did not induce longer manipulation times, consistent with a key prediction of the Boolean map theory. Our results show that Boolean maps are the manipulation unit of working memory.
AwhE.BartonB.VogelE. K. (2007). Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science, 18(7), 622–628.
2.
BaddeleyA. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255(5044), 556–559.
3.
BaddeleyA. D.HitchG. (1974). Working memory. In BowerG. H. (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47–89). Elsevier.
4.
BalabanH.LuriaR. (2016a). Integration of distinct objects in visual working memory depends on strong objecthood cues even for different-dimension conjunctions. Cerebral Cortex, 26(5), 2093–2104.
5.
BalabanH.LuriaR. (2016b). Object representations in visual working memory change according to the task context. Cortex, 81, 1–13.
6.
CroneE. A.WendelkenC.DonohueS.van LeijenhorstL.BungeS. A. (2006). Neurocognitive development of the ability to manipulate information in working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 103(24), 9315–9320.
7.
DavidsonM. C.AmsoD.AndersonL. C.DiamondA. (2006). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: Evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia, 44(11), 2037–2078.
8.
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.
9.
DuncanJ. (1980a). The demonstration of capacity limitation. Cognitive Psychology, 12(1), 75–96.
10.
DuncanJ. (1980b). The locus of interference in the perception of simultaneous stimuli. Psychological Review, 87(3), 272–300.
11.
EckerU. K.LewandowskyS.OberauerK. (2014). Removal of information from working memory: A specific updating process. Journal of Memory and Language, 74, 77–90.
12.
GaravanH. (1998). Serial attention within working memory. Memory & Cognition, 26(2), 263–276.
13.
GazzaleyA.NobreA. C. (2012). Top-down modulation: Bridging selective attention and working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 129–135.
14.
HuangL. (2010). What is the unit of visual attention? Object for selection, but Boolean map for access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 139(1), 162–179.
15.
HuangL. (2015a). Color is processed less efficiently than orientation in change detection but more efficiently in visual search. Psychological Science, 26(5), 646–652.
16.
HuangL. (2015b). Visual features for perception, attention, and working memory: Toward a three-factor framework. Cognition, 145, 43–52.
17.
HuangL. (2020). Unit of visual working memory: A Boolean map provides a better account than an object does. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(1), 1–30.
18.
HuangL.PashlerH. (2007). A Boolean map theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 114(3), 599–631.
19.
HuangL.TreismanA.PashlerH. (2007). Characterizing the limits of human visual awareness. Science, 317(5839), 823–825.
20.
JanssenA. B.GeiserC. (2012). Cross-cultural differences in spatial abilities and solution strategies—An investigation in Cambodia and Germany. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(4), 533–557.
21.
JosephR. M.McGrathL. M.Tager-FlusbergH. (2005). Executive dysfunction and its relation to language ability in verbal school-age children with autism. Developmental Neuropsychology, 27(3), 361–378.
22.
KesslerY.MeiranN. (2008). Two dissociable updating processes in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34(6), 1339–1348.
23.
KesslerY.OberauerK. (2014). Working memory updating latency reflects the cost of switching between maintenance and updating modes of operation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(3), 738–754.
24.
KleinerM.BrainardD.PelliD. (2007). What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3. Perception, 36, 1.
25.
KoP. C.SeiffertA. E. (2009). Updating objects in visual short-term memory is feature selective. Memory & Cognition, 37, 909–923.
26.
KongG.FougnieD. (2019). Visual search within working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(10), 1688–1700.
27.
KoshinoH.KanaR. K.KellerT. A.CherkasskyV. L.MinshewN. J.JustM. A. (2008). fMRI investigation of working memory for faces in autism: Visual coding and underconnectivity with frontal areas. Cerebral Cortex, 18(2), 289–300.
28.
LendínezC.PelegrinaS.LechugaT. (2011). The distance effect in numerical memory-updating tasks. Memory & Cognition, 39, 675–685.
29.
Lewis-PeacockJ. A.KesslerY.OberauerK. (2018). The removal of information from working memory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1424(1), 33–44.
30.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279–281.
31.
LuckS. J.VogelE. K. (2013). Visual working memory capacity: From psychophysics and neurobiology to individual differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(8), 391–400.
32.
MaunsellJ. H.TreueS. (2006). Feature-based attention in visual cortex. Trends in Neurosciences, 29(6), 317–322.
33.
MohrH. M.GoebelR.LindenD. E. (2006). Content- and task-specific dissociations of frontal activity during maintenance and manipulation in visual working memory. Journal of Neuroscience, 26(17), 4465–4471.
34.
MooreC. M.EgethH. (1998). How does feature-based attention affect visual processing?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 24(4), 1296–1310.
35.
NgiamW. X. Q. (2024). Mapping visual working memory models to a theoretical framework. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 31, 442–459.
36.
NgiamW. X. Q.LoetscherK. B.AwhE. (2023). Object-based encoding constrains storage in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. Advanced online publication.
37.
NothdurftH. C. (1993). The role of features in preattentive vision: Comparison of orientation, motion and color cues. Vision Research, 33(14), 1937–1958.
38.
OberauerK. (2002). Access to information in working memory: Exploring the focus of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 28(3), 411–421.
39.
OberauerK.LewandowskyS.AwhE.BrownG. D. A.ConwayA.CowanN.DonkinC.FarrellS.HitchG. J.HurlstoneM. J.MaW. J.MoreyC. C.NeeD. E.SchweppeJ.VergauweE.WardG. (2018). Benchmarks for models of short-term and working memory. Psychological Bulletin, 144(9), 885–958.
40.
O’BrienF.CousineauD. (2014). Representing error bars in within-subject designs in typical software packages. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 10(1), 56–67.
41.
PailianH.HalberdaJ. (2013). Independent costs for storing and manipulating information in visual working memory. Visual Cognition, 21(6), 704–707.
42.
PetersonD. J.GözenmanF.ArciniegaH.BerryhillM. E. (2015). Contralateral delay activity tracks the influence of Gestalt grouping principles on active visual working memory representations. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 77, 2270–2283.
43.
RabbittL. R.RobertsD. M.McDonaldC. G.PetersonM. S. (2017). Neural activity reveals perceptual grouping in working memory. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 113, 40–45.
44.
RoseN. S.LaRocqueJ. J.RiggallA. C.GosseriesO.StarrettM. J.MeyeringE. E.PostleB. R. (2016). Reactivation of latent working memories with transcranial magnetic stimulation. Science, 354(6316), 1136–1139.
45.
SchollB. J.PylyshynZ. W.FeldmanJ. (2001). What is a visual object? Evidence from target merging in multiple object tracking. Cognition, 80(1–2), 159–177.
46.
ShenM.YuW.XuX.GaoZ. (2013). Building blocks of visual working memory: Objects or Boolean maps?Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 25(5), 743–753.
47.
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.
48.
Superbia-GuimarãesL.CowanN. (2023). Disentangling processing and storage accounts of working memory development in childhood. Developmental Review, 69, Article 101089.
49.
ThyerW.AdamK. C.DiazG. K.Velázquez SánchezI. N.VogelE. K.AwhE. (2022). Storage in visual working memory recruits a content-independent pointer system. Psychological Science, 33(10), 1680–1694.
50.
van EdeF.NobreA. C. (2023). Turning attention inside out: How working memory serves behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 74, 137–165.
51.
WestfallJ. (2015). PANGEA: Power analysis for general ANOVA designs [Unpublished manuscript]. Available at https://osf.io/x5dc3/download
52.
WilliamsM.WoodmanG. F. (2012). Directed forgetting and directed remembering in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(5), 1206–1220.
53.
WolfeJ. M. (1994). Guided search 2.0: A revised model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 202–238.
54.
XuY. (2002). Limitations of object-based feature encoding in visual short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(2), 458–468.
55.
ZhangW.LuckS. J. (2008). Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory. Nature, 453(7192), 233–235.
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.
