Unfiltered and unforgotten: The fate of irrelevant visual stimuli in elderly adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to hold visual information in mind after it is no longer physically present seems to decline with age. Our study investigates whether this age-related decline may be a derivative of the poor ability to filter out irrelevant information. It has been shown that the contents of visual short-term memory (VSTM) can be reflected electrophysiologically when the task involves ignoring irrelevant information. Specifically, we were interested in the contralateral delay activity (CDA) where a difference wave is computed by subtracting the ipsilateral from the contralateral activity when subjects view bilateral displays. The amplitude of this difference has been found to correlate with VSTM capacity. Furthermore, young adults with low capacity show a sustained increase in CDA when presented with irrelevant information, suggesting that they do not effectively ignore these distractors. Using EEG, we employed a VSTM paradigm where participants' attention was directed either to the left or to the right of a fixation cross and they were asked to perform a memory task consisting of colored squares with set sizes of one and three. In some trials, colored circles would be presented amongst the target squares and young and old participants were asked to ignore these distractors. Interestingly, the CDA response in elderly adults does not seem to discriminate between relevant and irrelevant items. This failure to prioritize relevant information may contribute to the typically observed age-related decline in working memory performance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".