Independent Attention Mechanisms Control the Activation of Tactile and Visual Working Memory Representations

Tobias Katus, Martin Eimer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Working memory (WM) is limited in capacity, but it is controversial whether these capacity limitations are domain-general or are generated independently within separate modality-specific memory systems. These alternative accounts were tested in bimodal visual/tactile WM tasks. In Experiment 1, participants memorized the locations of simultaneously presented task-relevant visual and tactile stimuli. Visual and tactile WM load was manipulated independently (one, two, or three items per modality), and one modality was unpredictably tested after each trial. To track the activation of visual and tactile WM representations during the retention interval, the visual contralateral delay activity (CDA) and tactile CDA (tCDA) were measured over visual and somatosensory cortex, respectively. CDA and tCDA amplitudes were selectively affected by WM load in the corresponding (tactile or visual) modality. The CDA parametrically increased when visual load increased from one to two and to three items. The tCDA was enhanced when tactile load increased from one to two items and showed no further enhancement for three tactile items. Critically, these load effects were strictly modality-specific, as substantiated by Bayesian statistics. Increasing tactile load did not affect the visual CDA, and increasing visual load did not modulate the tCDA. Task performance at memory test was also unaffected by WM load in the other (untested) modality. This was confirmed in a second behavioral experiment where tactile and visual loads were either two or four items, unimodal baseline conditions were included, and participants performed a color change detection task in the visual modality. These results show that WM capacity is not limited by a domain-general mechanism that operates across sensory modalities. They suggest instead that WM storage is mediated by distributed modality-specific control mechanisms that are activated independently and in parallel during multisensory WM.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)644-655
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Volume30
Issue number5
Early online date29 Mar 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2018

Fingerprint

Touch
Short-Term Memory
Somatosensory Cortex
Task Performance and Analysis
Visual Cortex
Color

Keywords

  • Adult
  • Attention/physiology
  • Brain/physiology
  • Electroencephalography
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Male
  • Memory, Short-Term/physiology
  • Photic Stimulation
  • Physical Stimulation
  • Touch
  • Touch Perception/physiology
  • Visual Perception/physiology

Cite this

Independent Attention Mechanisms Control the Activation of Tactile and Visual Working Memory Representations. / Katus, Tobias; Eimer, Martin.

In: Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Vol. 30, No. 5, 05.2018, p. 644-655.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e901e9dc9e6a49d5ae74ccaeed18763a,
title = "Independent Attention Mechanisms Control the Activation of Tactile and Visual Working Memory Representations",
abstract = "Working memory (WM) is limited in capacity, but it is controversial whether these capacity limitations are domain-general or are generated independently within separate modality-specific memory systems. These alternative accounts were tested in bimodal visual/tactile WM tasks. In Experiment 1, participants memorized the locations of simultaneously presented task-relevant visual and tactile stimuli. Visual and tactile WM load was manipulated independently (one, two, or three items per modality), and one modality was unpredictably tested after each trial. To track the activation of visual and tactile WM representations during the retention interval, the visual contralateral delay activity (CDA) and tactile CDA (tCDA) were measured over visual and somatosensory cortex, respectively. CDA and tCDA amplitudes were selectively affected by WM load in the corresponding (tactile or visual) modality. The CDA parametrically increased when visual load increased from one to two and to three items. The tCDA was enhanced when tactile load increased from one to two items and showed no further enhancement for three tactile items. Critically, these load effects were strictly modality-specific, as substantiated by Bayesian statistics. Increasing tactile load did not affect the visual CDA, and increasing visual load did not modulate the tCDA. Task performance at memory test was also unaffected by WM load in the other (untested) modality. This was confirmed in a second behavioral experiment where tactile and visual loads were either two or four items, unimodal baseline conditions were included, and participants performed a color change detection task in the visual modality. These results show that WM capacity is not limited by a domain-general mechanism that operates across sensory modalities. They suggest instead that WM storage is mediated by distributed modality-specific control mechanisms that are activated independently and in parallel during multisensory WM.",
keywords = "Adult, Attention/physiology, Brain/physiology, Electroencephalography, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term/physiology, Photic Stimulation, Physical Stimulation, Touch, Touch Perception/physiology, Visual Perception/physiology",
author = "Tobias Katus and Martin Eimer",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1162/jocn_a_01239",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "644--655",
journal = "Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience",
issn = "0898-929X",
publisher = "MIT Press Journals",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Independent Attention Mechanisms Control the Activation of Tactile and Visual Working Memory Representations

AU - Katus, Tobias

AU - Eimer, Martin

PY - 2018/5

Y1 - 2018/5

N2 - Working memory (WM) is limited in capacity, but it is controversial whether these capacity limitations are domain-general or are generated independently within separate modality-specific memory systems. These alternative accounts were tested in bimodal visual/tactile WM tasks. In Experiment 1, participants memorized the locations of simultaneously presented task-relevant visual and tactile stimuli. Visual and tactile WM load was manipulated independently (one, two, or three items per modality), and one modality was unpredictably tested after each trial. To track the activation of visual and tactile WM representations during the retention interval, the visual contralateral delay activity (CDA) and tactile CDA (tCDA) were measured over visual and somatosensory cortex, respectively. CDA and tCDA amplitudes were selectively affected by WM load in the corresponding (tactile or visual) modality. The CDA parametrically increased when visual load increased from one to two and to three items. The tCDA was enhanced when tactile load increased from one to two items and showed no further enhancement for three tactile items. Critically, these load effects were strictly modality-specific, as substantiated by Bayesian statistics. Increasing tactile load did not affect the visual CDA, and increasing visual load did not modulate the tCDA. Task performance at memory test was also unaffected by WM load in the other (untested) modality. This was confirmed in a second behavioral experiment where tactile and visual loads were either two or four items, unimodal baseline conditions were included, and participants performed a color change detection task in the visual modality. These results show that WM capacity is not limited by a domain-general mechanism that operates across sensory modalities. They suggest instead that WM storage is mediated by distributed modality-specific control mechanisms that are activated independently and in parallel during multisensory WM.

AB - Working memory (WM) is limited in capacity, but it is controversial whether these capacity limitations are domain-general or are generated independently within separate modality-specific memory systems. These alternative accounts were tested in bimodal visual/tactile WM tasks. In Experiment 1, participants memorized the locations of simultaneously presented task-relevant visual and tactile stimuli. Visual and tactile WM load was manipulated independently (one, two, or three items per modality), and one modality was unpredictably tested after each trial. To track the activation of visual and tactile WM representations during the retention interval, the visual contralateral delay activity (CDA) and tactile CDA (tCDA) were measured over visual and somatosensory cortex, respectively. CDA and tCDA amplitudes were selectively affected by WM load in the corresponding (tactile or visual) modality. The CDA parametrically increased when visual load increased from one to two and to three items. The tCDA was enhanced when tactile load increased from one to two items and showed no further enhancement for three tactile items. Critically, these load effects were strictly modality-specific, as substantiated by Bayesian statistics. Increasing tactile load did not affect the visual CDA, and increasing visual load did not modulate the tCDA. Task performance at memory test was also unaffected by WM load in the other (untested) modality. This was confirmed in a second behavioral experiment where tactile and visual loads were either two or four items, unimodal baseline conditions were included, and participants performed a color change detection task in the visual modality. These results show that WM capacity is not limited by a domain-general mechanism that operates across sensory modalities. They suggest instead that WM storage is mediated by distributed modality-specific control mechanisms that are activated independently and in parallel during multisensory WM.

KW - Adult

KW - Attention/physiology

KW - Brain/physiology

KW - Electroencephalography

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Memory, Short-Term/physiology

KW - Photic Stimulation

KW - Physical Stimulation

KW - Touch

KW - Touch Perception/physiology

KW - Visual Perception/physiology

UR - http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/21428/

U2 - 10.1162/jocn_a_01239

DO - 10.1162/jocn_a_01239

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 644

EP - 655

JO - Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

JF - Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

SN - 0898-929X

IS - 5

ER -