Can irrelevant self-related information in working memory be actively suppressed?

Abstract

To utilize the resource of working memory efficiently, the brain actively suppresses irrelevant information to focus cognitive resources on the task at hand. However, whether task-irrelevant self-related information can be suppressed is still an open question. This study explores the inhibitory effects of various types of identity-associated information (self, friend, stranger) with an irrelevant distracting paradigm, in which participants are required to memorize the color while ignoring the shape during a memory array. In the subsequent test array, participants are asked to judge whether the color of the test item is the same as the memorized one, while the ignored shape features could also change. The results are as follows. (1) Self-associated information survived the inhibitory effect no matter whether the interstimulus interval (ISI) was short or long. (2) Stranger-associated information remained inhibitory effect in a long ISI (3000 ms). The results indicate that self-associated information can bypass the executive system and remain active in working memory processing.

Keywords

attended but outdated / inhibition effect / self-associated / working memory

References

[1] Alexopoulos, T., Muller, D., Ric, F., & Marendaz, C. (2012). I, me, mine: Automatic attentional capture by self-related stimuli. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(6), 770–779.

[2] Awh, E., Vogel, E. K., & Oh, S. H. (2006). Interactions between attention and working memory. Neuroscience, 139(1), 201–208.

[3] Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4(10), 829–839.

[4] Brainard, D. H. (1997). The Psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 433–436.

[5] Carlisle, N. B., & Woodman, G. F. (2011). When memory is not enough: Electrophysiological evidence for goal-dependent use of working memory representations in guiding visual attention. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(10), 2650–2664.

[6] Cowan, N. (2001). The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 87–114.

[7] Downing, P. E. (2000). Interactions between visual working memory and selective attention. Psychological Science, 11(6), 467–473.

[8] Ecker, U. K., Maybery, M., & Zimmer, H. D. (2013). Binding of intrinsic and extrinsic features in working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(1), 218.

[9] Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.

[10] Fu, Y., Zhou, Y., Zhou, J., Shen, M., & Chen, H. (2021). More attention with less working memory: The active inhibition of attended but outdated information. Science. Advances, 7(47), eabj4985.

[11] Gao, T., Gao, Z., Li, J., Sun, Z., & Shen, M. (2011). The perceptual root of object-based storage: An interactive model of perception and visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(6), 1803.

[12] Gazzaley, A., & Nobre, A. C. (2012). Top-down modulation: Bridging selective attention and working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(2), 129–135.

[13] Humphreys, G. W., & Sui, J. (2016). Attentional control and the self: The self-attention network (SAN). Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(1–4), 5–17.

[14] Hyun, J. S., Woodman, G. F., Vogel, E. K., Hollingworth, A., & Luck, S. J. (2009). The comparison of visual working memory representations with perceptual inputs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(4), 1140–1160.

[15] Keyes, H., & Brady, N. (2010). Self-face recognition is characterized by “bilateral gain” and by faster, more accurate performance which persists when faces are inverted. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(5), 840–847.

[16] Kleiner, M., Brainard, D., Pelli, D., Ingling, A., Murray, R., & Broussard, C. (2007). What’s new in psychtoolbox-3. Perception, 36(14), 1–16.

[17] Kumar, S., Soto, D., & Humphreys, G. W. (2009). Electrophysiological evidence for attentional guidance by the contents of working memory. European Journal of Neuroscience, 30(2), 307–317.

[18] Liu, M., He, X., Rotsthein, P., & Sui, J. (2016). Dynamically orienting your own face facilitates the automatic attraction of attention. Cognitive Neuroscience, 7(1–4), 37–44.

[19] Luck, S. J., & Vogel, E. K. (1997). The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature, 390(6657), 279–281.

[20] Macrae, C. N., Visokomogilski, A., Golubickis, M., & Sahraie, A. (2018). Self-relevance enhances the benefits of attention on perception. Visual Cognition, 26(7), 475–481.

[21] Northoff, G., Heinzel, A., De Greck, M., Bermpohl, F., Dobrowolny, H., & Panksepp, J. (2006). Self-referential processing in our brain—A meta-analysis of imaging studies on the self. NeuroImage, 31(1), 440–457.

[22] Ravizza, S. M., & Hazeltine, E. (2013). The benefits of stimulus-driven attention for working memory encoding. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(3), 384–396.

[23] Stolte, M., Humphreys, G., Yankouskaya, A., & Sui, J. (2017). Dissociating biases towards the self and positive emotion. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 70(6), 1011–1022.

[24] Sui, J., & Gu, X. (2017). Self as object: Emerging trends in self research. Trends in Neurosciences, 40(11), 643–653.

[25] Sui, J., He, X., & Humphreys, G. W. (2012). Perceptual effects of social salience: Evidence from self-prioritization effects on perceptual matching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(5), 1105.

[26] Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015a). The interaction between self-bias and reward: Evidence for common and distinct processes. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(10), 1952–1964.

[27] Sui, J., & Humphreys, G. W. (2015b). The integrative self: How self-reference integrates perception and memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(12), 719–728.

[28] Sui, J., & Rotshtein, P. (2019). Self-prioritization and the attentional systems. Current Opinion in Psychology, 29, 148–152.

[29] Sui, J., Rotshtein, P., & Humphreys, G. W. (2013). Coupling social attention to the self forms a network for personal significance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(19), 7607–7612.

[30] Trutti, A. C., Verschooren, S., Forstmann, B. U., & Boag, R. J. (2021). Understanding subprocesses of working memory through the lens of model-based cognitive neuroscience. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 38, 57–65.

[31] Yantis, S. (2000). Goal-directed and stimulus-driven determinants of attentional control. Attention and Performance, 18(Chapter 3), 73–103.

[32] Yin, S., Bi, T., Chen, A., & Egner, T. (2021). Ventromedial prefrontal cortex drives the prioritization of self-associated stimuli in working memory. The Journal of Neuroscience, 41(9), 2012–2023.

[33] Yin, S., Sui, J., Chiu, Y. C., Chen, A., & Egner, T. (2019). Automatic prioritization of self-referential stimuli in working memory. Psychological Science, 30(3), 415–423.

[34] Zhang, W., & Luck, S. J. (2008). Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory. Nature, 453(7192), 233–235.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). PsyCh Journal published by Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.