Eye Movements of Spatial Working Memory Encoding in Children with and without Autism: Chunking Processing and Reference Preference

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Songze Li ◽  
Jinsheng Hu ◽  
Ruosong Chang ◽  
Qi Li ◽  
Peng Wan ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew S. Peterson ◽  
Eric J. Blumberg ◽  
Supreet Sachdeva

1996 ◽  
Vol 49 (4) ◽  
pp. 940-949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary M. Smyth

We have previously argued that rehearsal in spatial working memory is interfered with by spatial attention shifts rather than simply by movements to locations in space (Smyth & Scholey, 1994). It is possible, however, that the stimuli intended to induce attention shifts in our experiments also induced eye movements and interfered either with an overt eye movement rehearsal strategy or with a covert one. In the first experiment reported here, subjects fixated while they maintained a sequence of spatial items in memory before recalling them in order. Fixation did not affect recall, but auditory spatial stimuli presented during the interval did decrease performance, and it was further decreased if the stimuli were categorized as coming from the right or the left. A second experiment investigated the effects of auditory spatial stimuli to which no response was ever required and found that these did not interfere with performance, indicating that it is the spatial salience of targets that leads to interference. This interference from spatial input in the absence of any overt movement of the eyes or limbs is interpreted in terms of shifts of spatial attention or spatial monitoring, which Morris (1989) has suggested affects spatial encoding and which our findings suggest also affects reactivation in rehearsal.


2011 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 827-838 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabian Fusser ◽  
David E. J. Linden ◽  
Benjamin Rahm ◽  
Harald Hampel ◽  
Corinna Haenschel ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 500 (2) ◽  
pp. 118-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Hönegger ◽  
Christoph Atteneder ◽  
Birgit Griesmayr ◽  
Elisa Holz ◽  
Emily Weber ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomoki Kurikawa ◽  
Kenji Mizuseki ◽  
Tomoki Fukai

SummaryDuring the execution of working memory tasks, task-relevant information is processed by local circuits across multiple brain regions. How this multi-area computation is conducted by the brain remains largely unknown. To explore such mechanisms in spatial working memory, we constructed a neural network model involving parvalbumin-positive, somatostatin-positive and vasoactive intestinal polypeptide-positive interneurons in the hippocampal CA1 and the superficial and deep layers of medial entorhinal cortex (MEC). Our model is based on a hypothesis that cholinergic modulations differently regulate information flows across CA1 and MEC at memory encoding, maintenance and recall during delayed nonmatching-to-place tasks. In the model, theta oscillation coordinates the proper timing of interactions between these regions. Furthermore, the model predicts that MEC is engaged in decoding as well as encoding spatial memory, which we confirmed by experimental data analysis. Thus, our model accounts for the neurobiological characteristics of the cross-area information routing underlying working memory tasks.


2011 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 257-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Schüler ◽  
Katharina Scheiter ◽  
Peter Gerjets

Abstract.The current study tested the assumption that the modality effect in multimedia learning only appears when the text conveys spatial rather than non-spatial information. This assumption is based on findings from working memory research suggesting that the processing of spatial text contents and the execution of eye movements during reading may interfere with each other in visuo-spatial working memory. To test this hypothesis, 80 students were randomly assigned to four groups, resulting from a 2 × 2 design with text modality (spoken vs. written text) and text contents (visual vs. spatial) as between-subject factors. Learning outcomes were measured by means of text and picture recognition. Eye movements were recorded during learning. The results did not confirm the expected interaction between text content and text modality. In addition, the main effect of text modality effect was limited to picture recognition but did not appear for text recognition. This modality effect was mediated by the amount of concentration participants reported to have invested into studying the pictures. These results imply that the often found superiority of spoken text in multimedia learning might simply be due to a better availability of pictorial information instead of an overload of visuo-spatial working memory when processing written text.


2006 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley R. Postle ◽  
Christopher Idzikowski ◽  
Sergio Della Sala ◽  
Robert H. Logie ◽  
Alan D. Baddeley

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document