Gaze Reinstatement Supports Relational Memory in Younger and Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eye movements support memory encoding by binding distinct elements of the visual world into rich relational representations. However, the role of eye movements in memory retrieval is less clear. In this thesis, I propose that eye movements play an active and functional role in memory retrieval by reinstating the encoding context. Specifically, by overtly shifting attention in a manner that broadly recapitulates the spatial locations and temporal order of encoded content, eye movements facilitate access to, and reactivation of, associated details. Study 1 demonstrates that both younger and older adults recruit gaze reinstatement to support the retention of visuospatial arrays over long and short intervals, respectively. Studies 2 and 3 provide further evidence that gaze reinstatement facilitates long term episodic retrieval in younger and older adults. Specifically, in Study 1, reinstatement of encoding-related eye movements during an immediately succeeding, stimulus-free maintenance period was positively correlated with performance on a subsequent change detection task. Moreover, the relationship between gaze reinstatement and mnemonic performance varied as a function of both age and memory load, suggesting that eye movements may play a compensatory role in memory retention over short delays. Extending this work, Studies 2 and 3 showed that whereas gaze reinstatement following a degraded and briefly presented old test probe image was correlated with correct recognition, reinstatement following a lure test probe was correlated with false alarms, suggesting that eye movements are involved in the pattern completion of incomplete visual cues from memory. Although this finding was observed in both younger and older adults, younger adults showed a pattern of reinstatement that was more episodic and idiosyncratic relative to older adults, further suggesting that the nature of the relationship between eye movements and memory retrieval may vary as a function of age and memory integrity. Together, the results of the presented studies suggest that gaze reinstatement may be obligatorily recruited to support memory maintenance and retrieval when task demands exceed cognitive resources.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".