Visual working memory models of delayed estimation do not generalize to whole-report tasks.

IF 2 4区 心理学 Q2 OPHTHALMOLOGY Journal of Vision Pub Date : 2024-07-02 DOI:10.1167/jov.24.7.16
Benjamin Cuthbert, Dominic Standage, Martin Paré, Gunnar Blohm
{"title":"Visual working memory models of delayed estimation do not generalize to whole-report tasks.","authors":"Benjamin Cuthbert, Dominic Standage, Martin Paré, Gunnar Blohm","doi":"10.1167/jov.24.7.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Whole-report working memory tasks provide a measure of recall for all stimuli in a trial and afford single-trial analyses that are not possible with single-report delayed estimation tasks. However, most whole-report studies assume that trial stimuli are encoded and reported independently, and they do not consider the relationships between stimuli presented and reported within the same trial. Here, we present the results of two independently conducted whole-report experiments. The first dataset was recorded by Adam, Vogel, and Awh (2017) and required participants to report color and orientation stimuli using a continuous response wheel. We recorded the second dataset, which required participants to report color stimuli using a set of discrete buttons. We found that participants often group their reports by color similarity, contradicting the assumption of independence implicit in most encoding models of working memory. Next, we showed that this behavior was consistent across participants and experiments when reporting color but not orientation, two circular variables often assumed to be equivalent.Finally, we implemented an alternative to independent encoding where stimuli are encoded as a hierarchical Bayesian ensemble and found that this model predicts biases that are not present in either dataset. Our results suggest that assumptions made by both independent and hierarchical ensemble encoding models-which were developed in the context of single-report delayed estimation tasks-do not hold for the whole-report task. This failure to generalize highlights the need to consider variations in task structure when inferring fundamental principles of visual working memory.</p>","PeriodicalId":49955,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vision","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11282892/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vision","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.24.7.16","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Whole-report working memory tasks provide a measure of recall for all stimuli in a trial and afford single-trial analyses that are not possible with single-report delayed estimation tasks. However, most whole-report studies assume that trial stimuli are encoded and reported independently, and they do not consider the relationships between stimuli presented and reported within the same trial. Here, we present the results of two independently conducted whole-report experiments. The first dataset was recorded by Adam, Vogel, and Awh (2017) and required participants to report color and orientation stimuli using a continuous response wheel. We recorded the second dataset, which required participants to report color stimuli using a set of discrete buttons. We found that participants often group their reports by color similarity, contradicting the assumption of independence implicit in most encoding models of working memory. Next, we showed that this behavior was consistent across participants and experiments when reporting color but not orientation, two circular variables often assumed to be equivalent.Finally, we implemented an alternative to independent encoding where stimuli are encoded as a hierarchical Bayesian ensemble and found that this model predicts biases that are not present in either dataset. Our results suggest that assumptions made by both independent and hierarchical ensemble encoding models-which were developed in the context of single-report delayed estimation tasks-do not hold for the whole-report task. This failure to generalize highlights the need to consider variations in task structure when inferring fundamental principles of visual working memory.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
延迟估计的视觉工作记忆模型不能推广到整体报告任务中。
整体报告工作记忆任务提供了对一个试验中所有刺激的回忆测量,并可进行单次试验分析,而单次报告延迟估计任务则无法做到这一点。然而,大多数整体报告研究都假定试验刺激是独立编码和报告的,而且不考虑同一试验中呈现和报告的刺激之间的关系。在此,我们介绍两个独立进行的整体报告实验的结果。第一个数据集由 Adam、Vogel 和 Awh(2017 年)记录,要求参与者使用连续反应轮报告颜色和方向刺激。我们记录的第二个数据集要求参与者使用一组离散按钮报告颜色刺激。我们发现,参与者经常根据颜色的相似性对他们的报告进行分组,这与大多数工作记忆编码模型中隐含的独立性假设相矛盾。最后,我们采用了一种独立编码的替代方法,即把刺激物作为一个分层贝叶斯集合进行编码,并发现这种模型预测出的偏差在两个数据集中都不存在。我们的研究结果表明,独立编码模型和分层集合编码模型都是在单次报告延迟估计任务的背景下开发的,而这两种模型的假设在整体报告任务中都不成立。这种不具有普遍性的情况突出表明,在推断视觉工作记忆的基本原理时,需要考虑任务结构的变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Vision
Journal of Vision 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
218
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Exploring all aspects of biological visual function, including spatial vision, perception, low vision, color vision and more, spanning the fields of neuroscience, psychology and psychophysics.
期刊最新文献
Individual differences reveal similarities in serial dependence effects across perceptual tasks, but not to oculomotor tasks. Investigating the relationship between subjective perception and unconscious feature integration. Binocular integration of chromatic and luminance signals. Deep convolutional neural networks are sensitive to face configuration. How the window of visibility varies around polar angle.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1