EEG alpha power predicts the temporal sensitivity of multisensory perception.

Pre-stimulus electroencephalogram (EEG) oscillations, especially in the alpha range (8-13 Hz), can affect the sensitivity to temporal lags between modalities in multisensory perception. The effects of alpha power are often explained in terms of alpha's inhibitory functions, whereas effects of alpha frequency have bolstered theories of discrete perceptual cycles, where the length of a cycle, or window of integration, is determined by alpha frequency. Such studies typically employ visual detection paradigms with near-threshold or even illusory stimuli. It is unclear whether such results generalize to above-threshold stimuli. Here, we recorded EEG, while measuring temporal discrimination sensitivity in a temporal-order judgement task using above-threshold auditory and visual stimuli. We tested whether the power and instantaneous frequency of pre-stimulus oscillations predict audiovisual temporal discrimination sensitivity on a trial-by-trial basis. By applying a jackknife procedure to link single-trial pre-stimulus oscillatory power and instantaneous frequency to psychometric measures, we identified a posterior cluster where lower alpha power was associated with higher temporal sensitivity of audiovisual discrimination. No statistically significant relationship between instantaneous alpha frequency and temporal sensitivity was found. These results suggest that temporal sensitivity for above-threshold multisensory stimuli fluctuates from moment to moment and is indexed by modulations in alpha power.

Associations between different white matter properties and reward-based performance modulation.

Humans can be motivated by the prospect of gaining a reward. However, the extent to which we are affected by reward information differs from person to person. A possible mechanism underlying these inter-individual differences may be alterations in white matter (WM) microstructure; however, the relationship between WM properties and reward-based behaviour in healthy participants has not yet been explored. Here, we used a fixel-based approach to investigate potential associations between WM tracts and performance in a reward-cuing task. We found that WM properties in the corpus callosum, right uncinate fasciculus, left ventral cingulum, and accumbofrontal tracts were inversely related to reward-triggered performance benefits (indexed by faster reaction times). Moreover, smaller WM property values in the corpus callosum, uncinate fasciculus, and accumbofrontal tracts were associated with higher scores on the Behavioral Inhibition System scale, reflecting greater sensitivity to potential punishment. Finally, we also observed associations between functional hemodynamic activity in the ventral striatum and WM microstructure. The finding that reward-based behavioural benefits are related to lower measures of WM tracts is in contrast to studies linking higher WM metrics to superior cognitive performance. We interpret the current pattern in terms of higher susceptibility to motivationally relevant stimuli, which is in line with the current and previous studies reporting inverse relationships between WM properties and motivational traits. Taking a broader perspective, such propensities may only be beneficial up to a certain point, at which these may become detrimental to performance and even manifest as impulsive and addictive behaviour.

Contralateral delay activity does not reflect behavioral feature load in visual working memory.

An ongoing debate in visual working memory research is concentrated on whether visual working memory capacity is determined solely by the number of objects to be memorized, or additionally by the number of relevant features contained within objects. Using a novel change detection task that contained multi-feature objects we examined the effect of both object number and feature number on visual working memory capacity, change detection sensitivity, and posterior slow wave event-related brain potential (ERP) activity. Behaviorally, working memory capacity and sensitivity were modulated as a function of both the number of objects and the number of features memorized per object. However, the Contralateral Delay Activity (CDA) was only sensitive to the number of objects, but not to the number of features. This suggests that while both objects and features contribute to limitations in visual working memory capacity, the CDA is an insufficient mechanism to account for feature level representations.

A multisensory perspective of working memory.

Although our sensory experience is mostly multisensory in nature, research on working memory representations has focused mainly on examining the senses in isolation. Results from the multisensory processing literature make it clear that the senses interact on a more intimate manner than previously assumed. These interactions raise questions regarding the manner in which multisensory information is maintained in working memory. We discuss the current status of research on multisensory processing and the implications of these findings on our theoretical understanding of working memory. To do so, we focus on reviewing working memory research conducted from a multisensory perspective, and discuss the relation between working memory, attention, and multisensory processing in the context of the predictive coding framework. We argue that a multisensory approach to the study of working memory is indispensable to achieve a realistic understanding of how working memory processes maintain and manipulate information.

Effects of motor congruence on visual working memory.

Grounded-cognition theories suggest that memory shares processing resources with perception and action. The motor system could be used to help memorize visual objects. In two experiments, we tested the hypothesis that people use motor affordances to maintain object representations in working memory. Participants performed a working memory task on photographs of manipulable and nonmanipulable objects. The manipulable objects were objects that required either a precision grip (i.e., small items) or a power grip (i.e., large items) to use. A concurrent motor task that could be congruent or incongruent with the manipulable objects caused no difference in working memory performance relative to nonmanipulable objects. Moreover, the precision- or power-grip motor task did not affect memory performance on small and large items differently. These findings suggest that the motor system plays no part in visual working memory.