title: Loss of visual working memory within seconds: the combined use of refreshable and non-refreshable features.
abstract: We reexamine the role of time in the loss of information from working memory, the limited information accessible for cognitive tasks. The controversial issue of whether working memory deteriorates over time was investigated using arrays of unconventional visual characters. Each array was followed by a postperceptual mask, a variable retention interval (RI), and a recognition probe character. Dramatic forgetting across an unfilled RI of up to 6 s was observed. Adding a distracting task during the RI (repetition, subtraction, or parity judgment using spoken digits) lowered the level of recall but not increasingly so across RIs. Also, arrays of English letters were not forgotten during the RI unless distracting stimuli were included, in contrast to the finding for unconventional characters. The results suggest that unconventional visual items include some features inevitably lost over time. Attention-related processing, however, assists in the retention of other features and of English letters. We identify important constraints for working memory theories and propose that an equilibrium between forgetting and reactivation holds but only for elements that are not inevitably lost over time.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri, 217 McAlester Hall, Columbia, MO 65211, USA. tjr899@mail.mizzou.edu
authors.forename: Timothy J
authors.initials: TJ
authors.lastname: Ricker
authors.forename: Nelson
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Cowan
mesh_terms: D000704:Analysis of Variance; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008569:Memory Disorders / Q000209:etiology / Q000503:physiopathology*; D008570:Memory, Short-Term / Q000502:physiology*; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D010364:Pattern Recognition, Visual / Q000502:physiology*; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D012153:Retention, Psychology / Q000502:physiology; D012691:Serial Learning; D013334:Students; D013997:Time Factors; D014495:Universities
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2007 Oct;35(7):1675-84
references.pmid: 18062545
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Oct;11(5):771-90
references.pmid: 15732687
references.citation: Cortex. 2007 Jan;43(1):135-45
references.pmid: 17334213
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1986 Jan;12(1):3-15
references.pmid: 2949048
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2010 Nov;22(11):2570-93
references.pmid: 19925207
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2002 Mar;9(1):59-79
references.pmid: 12026954
references.citation: Psychol Bull. 1988 Sep;104(2):163-91
references.pmid: 3054993
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2007 Jul;114(3):539-76
references.pmid: 17638496
references.citation: J Cogn Neurosci. 2001 Jan 1;13(1):59-71
references.pmid: 11224909
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2008 Jul;115(3):544-76
references.pmid: 18729591
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2007 Nov;136(4):663-84
references.pmid: 17999578
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2002 Oct;30(7):1086-95
references.pmid: 12507373
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2008 Nov;34(6):1561-4
references.pmid: 18980415
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 2009 Mar;37(2):164-74
references.pmid: 19223566
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2009 Feb;138(1):64-87
references.pmid: 19203170
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Mar;133(1):83-100
references.pmid: 14979753
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004 Sep;133(3):355-81
references.pmid: 15355144
references.citation: Cereb Cortex. 2003 Mar;13(3):265-73
references.pmid: 12571116
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Mar;13(3):120-6
references.pmid: 19223224
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2000 Nov 1;4(11):417-423
references.pmid: 11058819
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2010 Aug;17(4):516-21
references.pmid: 20702871
references.citation: Nature. 2006 Mar 2;440(7080):91-5
references.pmid: 16382240
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2009 Aug;62(8):1568-80
references.pmid: 19096989
references.citation: J Exp Psychol. 1959 Sep;58:193-8
references.pmid: 14432252
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Feb;24(1):87-114; discussion 114-85
references.pmid: 11515286
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2006 Jan;17(1):67-73
references.pmid: 16371146
references.citation: Nature. 2004 Apr 15;428(6984):751-4
references.pmid: 15085133
references.citation: Psychon Bull Rev. 2004 Apr;11(2):296-301
references.pmid: 15260196
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2009 Apr;20(4):423-8
references.pmid: 19320861
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Nov;35(6):1545-51
references.pmid: 19857023
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007 May;33(3):570-85
references.pmid: 17470006
references.citation: Mem Cognit. 1990 May;18(3):251-69
references.pmid: 2192233
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2007 Jul;18(7):622-8
references.pmid: 17614871
references.citation: Perception. 2002;31(5):579-89
references.pmid: 12044098
references.citation: Cogn Neuropsychol. 2003 May 1;20(3):487-506
references.pmid: 20957581
references.citation: Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2016 Oct;69(10):1969-95
references.pmid: 24853316
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2008 Nov;19(11):1078-81
references.pmid: 19076476
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2000 Nov;26(6):1589-625
references.pmid: 11185785
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2009 Jul;35(4):1012-28
references.pmid: 19586267
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2006 Dec;32(6):1436-51
references.pmid: 17154783