Decoding of Working Memory Contents in Auditory Cortex Is Not Distractor-Resistant.

Working memory enables the temporary storage of relevant information in the service of behavior. Neuroimaging studies have suggested that sensory cortex is involved in maintaining contents in working memory. This raised the question of how sensory regions maintain memory representations during the exposure to distracting stimuli. Multivariate pattern analysis of fMRI signals in visual cortex has shown that the contents of visual working memory could be decoded concurrently with passively viewed distractors. The present fMRI study tested whether this finding extends to auditory working memory and to active distractor processing. We asked participants to memorize the pitch of a target sound and to compare it with a probe sound presented after a 13 s delay period. In separate conditions, we compared a blank delay phase (no distraction) with either passive listening to, or active processing of, an auditory distractor presented throughout the memory delay. Consistent with previous reports, pitch-specific memory information could be decoded in auditory cortex during the delay in trials without distraction. In contrast, decoding of target sounds in early auditory cortex dropped to chance level during both passive and active distraction. This was paralleled by memory performance decrements under distraction. Extending the analyses beyond sensory cortex yielded some evidence for memory content-specific activity in inferior frontal and superior parietal cortex during active distraction. In summary, while our findings question the involvement of early auditory cortex in the maintenance of distractor-resistant working memory contents, further research should elucidate the role of hierarchically higher regions.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Information about sensory features held in working memory can be read out from hemodynamic activity recorded in human sensory cortices. Moreover, visual cortex can in parallel store visual content and process newly incoming, task-irrelevant visual input. The present study investigated the role of auditory cortex for working memory maintenance under distraction. While memorized sound frequencies could be decoded in auditory cortex in the absence of distraction, auditory distraction during the delay phase impaired memory performance and prevented decoding of information stored in working memory. Apparently, early auditory cortex is not sufficient to represent working memory contents under distraction that impairs performance. However, exploratory analyses indicated that, under distraction, higher-order frontal and parietal regions might contribute to content-specific working memory storage.

Decoding Concurrent Representations of Pitch and Location in Auditory Working Memory.

Multivariate analyses of hemodynamic signals serve to identify the storage of specific stimulus contents in working memory (WM). Representations of visual stimuli have been demonstrated both in sensory regions and in higher cortical areas. While previous research has typically focused on the WM maintenance of a single content feature, it remains unclear whether two separate features of a single object can be decoded concurrently. Also, much less evidence exists for representations of auditory compared with visual stimulus features. To address these issues, human participants had to memorize both pitch and perceived location of one of two sample sounds. After a delay phase, they were asked to reproduce either pitch or location. At recall, both features showed comparable levels of discriminability. Region of interest (ROI)-based decoding of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data during the delay phase revealed feature-selective activity for both pitch and location of a memorized sound in auditory cortex and superior parietal lobule. The latter region showed higher decoding accuracy for location than pitch. In addition, location could be decoded from angular and supramarginal gyrus and both superior and inferior frontal gyrus. The latter region also showed a trend for decoding of pitch. We found no region exclusively coding pitch memory information. In summary, the present study yielded evidence for concurrent representations of pitch and location of a single object both in sensory cortex and in hierarchically higher regions, pointing toward representation formats that enable feature integration within the same anatomic brain regions.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Decoding of hemodynamic signals serves to identify brain regions involved in the storage of stimulus-specific information in working memory (WM). While to-be-remembered information typically consists of several features, most previous investigations have focused on the maintenance of one memorized feature belonging to one visual object. The present study assessed the concurrent storage of two features of the same object in auditory WM. We found that both pitch and location of memorized sounds were decodable both in early sensory areas, in higher-level superior parietal cortex and, to a lesser extent, in inferior frontal cortex. While auditory cortex is known to process different features in parallel, their concurrent representation in parietal regions may support the integration of object features in WM.

Decoding Spatial Versus Non-spatial Processing in Auditory Working Memory.

OBJECTIVE: Research on visual working memory has shown that individual stimulus features are processed in both specialized sensory regions and higher cortical areas. Much less evidence exists for auditory working memory. Here, a main distinction has been proposed between the processing of spatial and non-spatial sound features. Our aim was to examine feature-specific activation patterns in auditory working memory. METHODS: We collected fMRI data while 28 healthy adults performed an auditory delayed match-to-sample task. Stimuli were abstract sounds characterized by both spatial and non-spatial information, i.e., interaural time delay and central frequency, respectively. In separate recording blocks, subjects had to memorize either the spatial or non-spatial feature, which had to be compared with a probe sound presented after a short delay. We performed both univariate and multivariate comparisons between spatial and non-spatial task blocks. RESULTS: Processing of spatial sound features elicited a higher activity in a small cluster in the superior parietal lobe than did sound pattern processing, whereas there was no significant activation difference for the opposite contrast. The multivariate analysis was applied using a whole-brain searchlight approach to identify feature-selective processing. The task-relevant auditory feature could be decoded from multiple brain regions including the auditory cortex, posterior temporal cortex, middle occipital gyrus, and extended parietal and frontal regions. CONCLUSION: In summary, the lack of large univariate activation differences between spatial and non-spatial processing could be attributable to the identical stimulation in both tasks. In contrast, the whole-brain multivariate analysis identified feature-specific activation patterns in widespread cortical regions. This suggests that areas beyond the auditory dorsal and ventral streams contribute to working memory processing of auditory stimulus features.

Context information supports serial dependence of multiple visual objects across memory episodes.

Serial dependence is thought to promote perceptual stability by compensating for small changes of an object's appearance across memory episodes. So far, it has been studied in situations that comprised only a single object. The question of how we selectively create temporal stability of several objects remains unsolved. In a memory task, objects can be differentiated by their to-be-memorized feature (content) as well as accompanying discriminative features (context). We test whether congruent context features, in addition to content similarity, support serial dependence. In four experiments, we observe a stronger serial dependence between objects that share the same context features across trials. Apparently, the binding of content and context features is not erased but rather carried over to the subsequent memory episode. As this reflects temporal dependencies in natural settings, our findings reveal a mechanism that integrates corresponding content and context features to support stable representations of individualized objects over time.

Two types of serial dependence in visual working memory.

Stimulus representations in working memory depend on memory traces of past stimuli both from previous trials and from the current trial. However, it is unclear whether the same or different mechanisms underlie this serial dependence across and within trials. We directly contrasted estimates of bias for pairs of immediately successive stimuli across and within trials. In each trial, participants memorized two consecutive motion direction stimuli (S1 and S2) and after a short delay were cued to report one of them. We found serial dependence across trials: The current S1 was attracted towards the preceding S2 when the latter had been cued for report. In contrast, within the same trial S2 was repulsed from S1. In addition, repulsion within a trial occurred for a broader range of motion direction differences between stimuli than attraction across trials. A second experiment in which 25% of trials did not require a response demonstrated that across-trial attraction did not depend on whether the previous S2 actually had to be reported. Our findings provide evidence for two types of serial dependence operating across and within trials. They support the notion of different mechanisms integrating or segregating current from similar past memory contents depending on their task relevance.