Electrophysiological Correlates of Visual Memory Search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In everyday life, we frequently engage in 'hybrid' visual and memory search, where we look for multiple items stored in memory (e.g., a mental shopping list) in our visual environment. Across three experiments, we used event-related potentials to better understand the contributions of visual working memory (VWM) and long-term memory (LTM) during the memory search component of hybrid search. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that the FN400 (an index of LTM recognition) and the CDA (an index of VWM load) increased with memory set size (target load), suggesting that both VWM and LTM are involved in memory search, even when target load exceeds capacity limitations of VWM. In Experiment 3, we used these electrophysiological indices to test how categorical similarity of targets and distractors affects memory search. The CDA and FN400 were modulated by memory set size only if items resembled targets. This suggests that dissimilar distractor items can be rejected before eliciting a memory search. Together, our findings demonstrate the interplay of VWM and LTM processes during memory search for multiple targets.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".