Teng Chunyue, Postle Bradley R
Department of Psychiatry, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Vis cogn. 2021;29(7):401-408. doi: 10.1080/13506285.2021.1883171. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
In her commentary, Xu (2020) admonishes the reader that "To have a full understanding of the cognitive mechanisms underlying VWM [visual working memory], both behavioral and neural evidence needs to be taken into account. This is a must, and not a choice, for any study that attempts to capture the nature of VWM" (p. 11). Although we don't disagree with this statement, our overall assessment of this commentary is that it, itself, fails to satisfy several "musts" and, consequently, does not pose a serious challenge for the sensory recruitment framework for understanding visual working memory. These "musts" include accurately characterizing the framework being critiqued, not favoring verbal models and intuition at the expense of formal quantitative models, and providing even-handed interpretation of the work of others. We'll conclude with a summary of how the sensory recruitment framework can be incorporated into a broader working model of visual working memory.
在她的评论中,徐(2020)告诫读者:“要全面理解视觉工作记忆(VWM)背后的认知机制,行为和神经方面的证据都需要考虑在内。对于任何试图把握VWM本质的研究来说,这是必须的,而非一种选择”(第11页)。虽然我们并不反对这一说法,但我们对这篇评论的总体评价是,它本身未能满足几个“必须”的要求,因此,对于理解视觉工作记忆的感觉募集框架来说,它并未构成严峻挑战。这些“必须”的要求包括准确描述所批评的框架,不以牺牲形式定量模型为代价而偏袒语言模型和直觉,以及对他人的研究工作进行公正的解读。我们将以总结感觉募集框架如何能够纳入更广泛的视觉工作记忆工作模型来结束本文。