Sustained attention required for effective dimension-based retro-cue benefit in visual working memory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In visual working memory (VWM) tasks, participants' performances can be improved through the use of dimension-based retro-cues, which direct internal attention to prioritize a particular dimension (e.g., color or orientation) of VWM representations even after the stimuli disappear. This phenomenon is known as the dimension-based retro-cue benefit (RCB). The present study investigates whether sustained attention is required for the dimension-based RCB by inserting interference or interruption between the retro-cue and the test array to distract attention. We tested the effects of perceptual interference or cognitive interruption on dimension-based RCB when the interference (Experiments 1 and 2 with masks) or interruption (Experiments 3 and 4 with an odd-even task) occurred concurrently with the stages for the maintenance of prioritized information (long cue-and-interference/interruption interstimulus interval, e.g., Experiments 1 and 3) or the deployment of attention (short cue-and-interference/interruption interstimulus interval, e.g., Experiments 2 and 4). Our results demonstrate that perceptual interference or cognitive interruption attenuates the dimension-based RCB. These findings suggest that sustained attention is necessary for the effective prioritization of a specific dimension of VWM representations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".