Author:
van Dooren Roel,Jongkees Bryant J.,Sellaro Roberta
Abstract
AbstractWorking memory (WM) involves a dynamic interplay between temporary maintenance and updating of goal-relevant information. The balance between maintenance and updating is regulated by an input-gating mechanism that determines which information should enter WM (gate opening) and which should be kept out (gate closing). We investigated whether updating and gate opening/closing are differentially sensitive to the kind of information to be encoded and maintained in WM. Specifically, since the social salience of a stimulus is known to affect cognitive performance, we investigated if self-relevant information differentially impacts maintenance, updating, or gate opening/closing. Participants first learned to associate two neutral shapes with two social labels (i.e., “you” vs. “stranger”), respectively. Subsequently they performed the reference-back paradigm, a well-established WM task that disentangles WM updating, gate opening, and gate closing. Crucially, the shapes previously associated with the self or a stranger served as target stimuli in the reference-back task. We replicated the typical finding of a repetition benefit when consecutive trials require opening the gate to WM. In Study 1 (N = 45) this advantage disappeared when self-associated stimuli were recently gated into WM and immediately needed to be replaced by stranger-associated stimuli. However, this was not replicated in a larger sample (Study 2; N = 90), where a repetition benefit always occurred on consecutive gate-opening trials. Overall, our results do not provide evidence that the self-relevance of stimuli modulates component processes of WM. We discuss possible reasons for this null finding, including the importance of continuous reinstatement and task-relevance of the shape-label associations.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference77 articles.
1. Alexopoulos, T., Muller, D., Ric, F., & Marendaz, C. (2012). I, me, mine: Automatic attentional capture by self-related stimuli. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(6), 770–779.
2. Baddeley, A. D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556–559.
3. Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 8, 47–89.
4. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300.
5. Berridge, K. C., & Robinson, T. E. (2003). Parsing reward. Trends in Neurosciences, 26(9), 507–513.