The effect of target detection on memory retrieval.

Attention and memory are fundamental cognitive processes that closely interact. In the attentional boost effect (ABE), the stimuli that co-occur with targets are remembered better than those that co-occur with distractors in target detection tasks performed during memory encoding. In target detection tasks performed during retrieval, the stimuli that co-occur with targets are recognized as 'old' more easily than the stimuli that co-occur with distractors. This study mainly explored the internal mechanism of the effect of target detection on recognition. In Experiment 1, the full attention (FA; where participants performed only the memory task) condition was used to compare with divided attention (DA; where participants performed target detection while performing memory retrieval) condition to explore the impact of target detection and distraction inhibition on recognition. In Experiment 2, the proportion of old and new words in the retrieval stage was adjusted to 1:1 to eliminate the possible reaction tendency caused by the high proportion of old words. In Experiment 3, the presentation time of words was extended to 1.5 s and 3 s to eliminate the possible impact of rapid processing. The results indicated that the effect of target detection on recognition was attributed to both target detection and distraction rejection and is not affected by the ratio of old and new words and the word presentation time. The effect of target detection on recognition may be owing to temporal yoking of the dual tasks, which is different from the effect of target detection on memory encoding.

The role of alerting in the attentional boost effect.

Stimuli presented simultaneously with behaviorally relevant events (e.g., targets) are better memorized, an unusual effect defined as the attentional boost effect (ABE). We hypothesized that all types of behaviorally relevant events, including attentional cues, can promote the encoding process for the stimuli paired with them, and the attentional alerting network can amplify the ABE. The two experiments we conducted demonstrated that not all behaviorally relevant events, including alerting cues, benefit the processing of concurrently paired stimuli. We also found that the presence of a cue prior to a target can extend the memory advantage produced by target detection, but this advantage can only be observed within a limited range of time. Overall, our study provides the first evidence that the alerting network plays an important role in the ABE.

Conditional automaticity: interference effects on the implicit memory retrieval process.

Many studies have indicated that executing a secondary task during encoding has little influence on implicit memory (priming effect). However, relatively few studies have discussed the effect of interference on implicit memory during retrieval. Our previous studies found asymmetry between implicit encoding and retrieval processes, with the priming effect disrupted by retrieval interference. Therefore, the present study investigated why and how the priming effect is affected by interference at retrieval. We adopted a dual-task paradigm, with a lexical decision task as the memory task and an odd-even decision task as the interference task. The effect of interference during retrieval was assessed by comparing the performance in the interference condition with that in the full-attention condition. In Experiment 1, we observed that the priming effect was absent in the synchronous retrieval interference condition. In Experiment 2, asynchronous interference was also found to block the priming effect. To verify the assumption that the priming effect is sensitive to attentional resource competition during retrieval, we used two different manipulations (an extended stimulus interval in the dual-task paradigm, Experiment 3, and an interference inhibition manipulation, Experiment 4) known to reduce attentional distraction. In these experiments, the priming effect was protected from interference effects. We suggest that implicit memory retrieval could be regarded as a conditional automatic process that depends on a configuration of the cognitive system by attention and task sets. If the limited resources are occupied by another task, the implicit retrieval process can be impacted.

The attentional boost effect with semantic information detection tasks.

The attentional boost effect (ABE) is a phenomenon in which in some dual tasks, increased attention to target detection causes an increase in memory performance related to items paired with the target. However, in previous studies concerning the ABE, the detection task objects usually reflected perceptual information. Whether the ABE could be observed if the task involves detecting semantic information is unclear. To answer this question, the present study adopted the classic dual-task paradigm of the ABE. Arabic numerals were used as semantic information stimuli in the detection tasks, and the degree of semantic processing in the detection task gradually increased over three experiments. The results showed that target detection with semantic information (i.e., digits) triggered the ABE (Experiment 1) and that the ABE was also generated under the semantic judgement-based detection task (i.e., odd-even detection task) regardless of whether the detection task used a single-target stimulus (Experiment 2) or a multi-target stimulus (Experiment 3). These findings indicate that an increased semantic load before the target decision in the detection task does not affect the ABE, and both perceptual detection and semantic detection can trigger the ABE.

The role of distractor inhibition in the attentional boost effect: evidence from the R/K paradigm.

Stimuli presented with targets in a detection task are later recognised more accurately than those presented with distractors, an unusual effect labelled the attentional boost effect (ABE). This effect may reflect an enhancement triggered by target detection, the inhibition of distractor rejection, or some combination of both. To test these possibilities, the present study adopted a baseline similar to that of Swallow and Jiang ([2014b]. The attentional boost effect really is a boost: evidence from a new baseline. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76(5), 1298-1307); the goal was to separate target-induced enhancements from distractor-induced inhibition. An R/K procedure was applied to further explore the kind of memory that might be affected by target detection or distractor rejection. The results show that the memory advantage for target-paired words was robust relative to that of baseline words; this advantage was mainly observed in R responses. More importantly, a memory reduction was also observed for distractor-paired words relative to baseline words, though this reduction was only observed in R responses. These data led us to conclude that the ABE was triggered by both processes: target-induced enhancement and distractor-induced inhibition. Moreover, both processes were more likely to affect recollection-based recognition.

Working Memory Load and Reminder Effect on Event-Based Prospective Memory of High- and Low-Achieving Students in Math.

The effects of working memory (WM) demand and reminders on an event-based prospective memory (PM) task were compared between students with low and high achievement in math. WM load (1- and 2-back tasks) was manipulated as a within-subject factor and reminder (with or without reminder) as a between-subject factor. Results showed that high-achieving students outperformed low-achieving students on all PM and n-back tasks. Use of a reminder improved PM performance and thus reduced prospective interference; the performance of ongoing tasks also improved for all students. Both PM and n-back performances in low WM load were better than in high WM load. High WM load had more influence on low-achieving students than on high-achieving students. Results suggest that low-achieving students in math were weak at PM and influenced more by high WM load. Thus, it is important to train these students to set up an obvious reminder for their PM and improve their WM.

Neural processing of recollection, familiarity and priming at encoding: evidence from a forced-choice recognition paradigm.

The distinction between neural mechanisms of explicit and implicit expressions of memory has been well studied at the retrieval stage, but less at encoding. In addition, dissociations obtained in many studies are complicated by methodological difficulties in obtaining process-pure measures of different types of memory. In this experiment, we applied a subsequent memory paradigm and a two-stage forced-choice recognition test to classify study ERP data into four categories: subsequent remembered (later retrieved accompanied by detailed information), subsequent known (later retrieved accompanied by a feeling of familiarity), subsequent primed (later retrieved without conscious awareness) and subsequent forgotten (not retrieved). Differences in subsequent memory effects (DM effects) were measured by comparing ERP waveform associated with later memory based on recollection, familiarity or priming with ERP waveform for later forgotten items. The recollection DM effect involved a robust sustained (onset at 300 ms) prefrontal positive-going DM effect which was right-lateralized, and a later (onset at 800 ms) occipital negative-going DM effect. Familiarity involved an earlier (300-400 ms) prefrontal positive-going DM effect and a later (500-600 ms) parietal positive-going DM effect. Priming involved a negative-going DM effect which onset at 600 ms, mainly distributed over anterior brain sites. These results revealed a sequence of components that represented cognitive processes underlying the encoding of verbal information into episodic memory, and separately supported later remembering, knowing and priming.