Abstract:The limited capacity of visual working memory (VWM) requires an efficient information selection mechanism. However, an uneconomical object-based encoding manner of VWM has been consistently found in previous studies. That is, not only the target feature, but also the task-irrelevant features from the same object are extracted into VWM. Besides the totally task-irrelevant feature which is never useful throughout the whole task, there is another kind of “irrelevant feature” that is necessary initially but no longer useful for the left task, termed as key feature in Chen & Wyble (2015)’s Attribute Amnesia studies. Previous studies showed that despite participants could not explicitly report the key feature in a surprise memory test, they had some memory traces for this unreportable information that could still produce an inter-trial priming effect. The current study sought to investigate the status of memory representation of a key feature by directly comparing it with the memory representation of a totally irrelevant feature from the same object (which serves as a baseline). In a series of experiments, participants were asked to memorize one feature of a single object, and then performed a visual search task in which there was either one of the distractors matching the task-irrelevant feature or key feature of the memory item, or there was no match between the memory and search display. Surprisingly, the results convergingly showed that despite a reliable WM-driven attentional bias effect (i.e., longer search time in the match condition than the no-match neutral condition) was generated by a task-irrelevant feature of an object, there was no such an effect triggered by the key feature. These findings suggested that participants might tend to actively inhibit just used information (i.e., key feature), resulting in even weaker memory representation of such information as compared to that of completely task-irrelevant features.

Backward inhibition in a task of switching attention within verbal working memory.

Reward Enhances Backward Inhibition in Task Switching

Effect of Attention and Working Memory Extract on Change Blindness

More Attention with Less Working Memory: the Active Inhibition of Attended but Outdated Information

Dissociated roles of the parietal and frontal cortices in the scope and control of attention during visual working memory.

Putting the "Return" Back in the Inhibition of Return Effect in Working Memory

Do we actively inhibit recently attended but no longer relevant information

Effects of forward and backward span trainings on working memory: Evidence from a randomized controlled trial

Inhibition of Return in Visual Working Memory

Effects of working memory span training on top-down attentional asymmetry at both neural and behavioral levels

Strategic Inhibition of Distractors with Visual Working Memory Contents after Involuntary Attention Capture

Backward inhibition effect affected by working memory capacity:a study with spatio-temporal patterns of event-related potentials

Visual Working-Memory Capacity Load Does Not Modulate Distractor Processing

Studies on the Capacity of Inhibition of Return

Behavioral and Functional MRI Study of Attention Shift in Human Verbal Working Memory.

Stimulus–response Complexity Influences Task-Set Inhibition in Task Switching

Involuntary and Voluntary Processes Compete for Entering the Focus of Attention of Working Memory.

Working-Memory-Guided Attention Competes with Exogenous Attention but Not with Endogenous Attention.

Transfer of working memory training to the inhibitory control of auditory distraction

Working Memory Operates Over The Same Representations As Attention

Attentional modulation of unconscious inhibitory visuomotor processes: An EEG study