Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, United States of America.
Department of Psychology, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, United States of America.
Cognition. 2021 Jun;211:104655. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104655. Epub 2021 Mar 20.
Researchers have investigated "refreshing" of items in working memory (WM) as a means of preserving them, while concurrently, other studies have examined "removal" of items from WM that are irrelevant. However, it is unclear whether refreshing and removal in WM truly represent different processes, or if participants, in an effort to avoid the to-be-removed items, simply refresh alternative items. We conducted two experiments to test whether these putative processes can be distinguished from one another. Participants were presented with sets of three words and then cued to either refresh one item or remove two items from WM, followed by a lexical decision probe containing either one of the just-seen words or a non-word. In Experiment 1, all probes were valid and in Experiment 2, probes were occasionally invalid (the probed word was one of the removed/non-refreshed items). In both experiments, participants also received a subsequent surprise long-term memory test. Results from both experiments suggested the expected advantages for refreshed (or non-removed) items in both short-term response time and long-term recognition, but no differences between refresh and remove instructions that would suggest a fundamental difference in processes. Thus, we argue that a functional distinction between refreshing and removal may not be necessary and propose that both of these putative processes could potentially be subsumed under an overarching conceptual perspective based on the flexible reallocation of mental or reflective attention.
研究人员已经研究了工作记忆(WM)中的“刷新”项目作为保存它们的一种手段,同时,其他研究也研究了从 WM 中删除不相关的项目。然而,目前尚不清楚 WM 中的刷新和删除是否真的代表不同的过程,或者参与者是否为了避免要删除的项目而简单地刷新其他项目。我们进行了两项实验来检验这些假定的过程是否可以相互区分。参与者首先呈现三组单词,然后提示他们刷新一个项目或从 WM 中删除两个项目,然后进行词汇判断探测,其中包含刚刚看到的单词之一或非单词。在实验 1 中,所有探测都是有效的,而在实验 2 中,探测偶尔是无效的(探测的单词是删除/未刷新的项目之一)。在这两项实验中,参与者还接受了随后的长期记忆惊喜测试。这两项实验的结果都表明,刷新(或未删除)项目在短期反应时间和长期识别方面都具有预期的优势,但刷新和删除指令之间没有差异,这表明这些过程没有根本区别。因此,我们认为刷新和删除之间的功能区别可能没有必要,并提出这两个假定的过程都可以潜在地归入基于灵活重新分配心理或反思注意力的总体概念视角之下。