A dual mechanisms of control account of age differences in working memory.

Age-related differences in working memory (WM) can be large, but the exact sources are unclear. We hypothesized that young adults outperform older adults on WM tasks because they use controlled attention processes to prioritize the maintenance of relevant information in WM in a proactive mode, whereas older adults tend to rely on the strength of familiarity signals to make memory decisions in a reactive mode. We used a WM task that cued participants to prioritize one item over others and presented repeated lure probes that cause errors when one is engaged in a reactive mode. Results showed that, relative to young adults with full attention available to use proactive control during the delays, older adults with full attention (and young adults with divided attention) during the delays had exaggerated error rates to repeated lure probes compared to control probes. When the amount of proactive interference was increased (by repeating stimuli across trials), older adults were able to engage in proactive control, and this eliminated their exaggerated error rate (while young adults with divided attention could not). These results provide evidence for a dual mechanisms of control account of age differences in WM. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Hippocampal involvement in working memory following refreshing.

Working memory (WM) and long-term memory (LTM) tests have both overlapping and distinct neurocognitive processes. Hippocampal activity in fMRI studies-a hallmark of LTM-also occurs on WM tasks, typically during encoding or retrieval and sometimes (albeit rarely) through 'late-delay' periods. The Synaptic Theory of WM suggests that 'activity-silent' synaptic weights retain temporary, WM-relevant codes without sustained, elevated activity. The hippocampus temporarily retains item-context bindings during WM-delays that are typically 'silent' to fMRI, probably via oscillatory patterns of informational connectivity among task-relevant regions of cortex. Advancing WM theory will require modeling this dynamic interplay, as in the 'Dynamic Processing Model of WM.

Uncertainty and predictiveness modulate attention in human predictive learning.

[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported online in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General on Jan 14 2021 (see record 2021-07705-001). In the article, formatting for UK Research Councils funding was omitted. The author note and copyright line now reflect the standard acknowledgment of and formatting for the funding received for this article. All versions of this article have been corrected.] Attention determines which cues receive processing and are learned about. Learning, however, leads to attentional biases. In the study of animal learning, in some circumstances, cues that have been previously predictive of their consequences are subsequently learned about more than are nonpredictive cues, suggesting that they receive more attention. In other circumstances, cues that have previously led to uncertain consequences are learned about more than are predictive cues. In human learning, there is a clear role for predictiveness, but a role for uncertainty has been less clear. Here, in a human learning task, we show that cues that led to uncertain outcomes were subsequently learned about more than were cues that were previously predictive of their outcomes. This effect occurred when there were few uncertain cues. When the number of uncertain cues was increased, attention switched to predictive cues. This pattern of results was found for cues (1) that were uncertain because they led to 2 different outcomes equally often in a nonpredictable manner and (2) that were used in a nonlinear discrimination and were not predictive individually but were predictive in combination with other cues. This suggests that both the opposing predictiveness and uncertainty effects were determined by the relationship between individual cues and outcomes rather than the predictive strength of combined cues. These results demonstrate that learning affects attention; however, the precise nature of the effect on attention depends on the level of task complexity, which reflects a potential switch between exploration and exploitation of cues. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Predictability of saccadic behaviors is modified by transcranial magnetic stimulation over human posterior parietal cortex.

Predictability in the visual environment provides a powerful cue for efficient processing of scenes and objects. Recently, studies have suggested that the directionality and magnitude of saccade curvature can be informative as to how the visual system processes predictive information. The present study investigated the role of the right posterior parietal cortex (rPPC) in shaping saccade curvatures in the context of predictive and non-predictive visual cues. We used an orienting paradigm that incorporated manipulation of target location predictability and delivered transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over rPPC. Participants were presented with either an informative or uninformative cue to upcoming target locations. Our results showed that rPPC TMS generally increased saccade latency and saccade error rates. Intriguingly, rPPC TMS increased curvatures away from the distractor only when the target location was unpredictable and decreased saccadic errors towards the distractor. These effects on curvature and accuracy were not present when the target location was predictable. These results dissociate the strong contingency between saccade latency and saccade curvature and also indicate that rPPC plays an important role in allocating and suppressing attention to distractors when the target demands visual disambiguation. Furthermore, the present study suggests that, like the frontal eye fields, rPPC is critically involved in determining saccade curvature and the generation of saccadic behaviors under conditions of differing target predictability.