Relationship between Working Memory and Internal Stimuli - Essay Example

Relationship between Working Memory and Internal Stimuli Relationship between Working Memory and Internal Stimuli Attention and working memory have been researched for a long time as distinct cognitive concepts. However, it has been noted that attention plays a crucial role in the control of activation, maintenance, as well as manipulation of representation in working memory. To some extent, working memory has been perceived as a way of maintaining representations in a manner that guides perceptual selective attention albeit in a voluntary manner. Over the recent past, researchers have noted that the contents of working memory can capture visual attention (Zhanga, Zhang, Huang, Kong, & Wang, 2011). Ostensibly, this takes place even in circumstances where such internally maintained representations are irrelevant, and usually detrimental, to the immediate external task. Therefore, the perfect relationship between working memory and attention remains obscured though it seems like they might be impacting each other in a bi-directional manner (Awh, & Jonides, 2001). This takes place whether or not the internal representations remain concordant with the external perpetual objectives. It is this reciprocation that appears to be affected by limited cognitive ability to address demands for either selection or maintenance (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). Thus, in order to understand whether working memory is simply the representation of attention to internal stimuli, there is a need to analyze the relationship between attention and working memory. Moreover, there need to assess the interdependence that takes place between these two cognitive concepts. In this regard, this paper aims at evaluating the relationship between working memory and attention in a bid to understand whether working memory is a representation of some form of attention to prevailing internal stimuli. Researchers have indicated that the close association between working memory and attention can be thought of as a scenario of give-and-take between some kind of attention. These are attention directed toward external perceptual stimuli or internal representations (Awh, Vogel, & Oh, 2006). In this context, the internal representations stand for the working memory while the external perpetual stimuli are representative of selective attention. The interdependence between the two concepts is premised on their shared dependence on a common cognitive resource. Thus, it is prudent to argue that attention and working memory may not necessarily be regarded as separate concepts or systems (Baddeley, 2003). Rather, they can be considered as competing factors that also influence each other due to their reliance on similarly limited resource. Such kind of approach can provide a succinct explanation for the apparent capture of visual attention by irrelevant contents of working memory. And a concise account of the underlying relationship between attention and working memory (Balani, Soto, & Humphreys, 2010). It is plausible that working memory facilitates the maintenance and manipulation of information without the need for sensory support. Given that working memory functions over internal representations that are often unavailable externally, it can be placed in the category of internal attention. However, it is noteworthy that working memory remains perfectly at the interface between external attention and internal attention (Beck, Hollingworth, & Luck, 2012). On the other hand, attention is an integral component of all cognitive and perpetual operations (Wilson, 2007). Due to the limited capability to process numerous competing operations, various mechanisms that underlie attention select, modulate and maintain concentration on information that has the greatest relevance to behavior. A crucial issue, however, is that attention tends to be quite ubiquitous that it is sometimes difficult to make a concise comprehension of it. In this regard, it would be precise to create a taxonomy based on the various types of information upon which attention operates, that is, the core focus of attention (Berry, 2009). From a broader perspective, such taxonomy differentiates between internal and external attention. While external attention encompasses the selection and modulation of sensory information, internal attention entails the selection, modulation, and maintenance of information that has been generated internally (Chun, Golomb, & Turk-Browne, 2011). Thus, external attention involves the selection of points in time, locations in space, or what would call the modality-specific input (Rabinovick, Tristan, & Varona, 2013). On the other hand, internal attention dwells on aspects such as task rules, long-term memory, and working memory. It is notable that working memory lies nearest to the inter-link between internal and external attention (Bollinger, 2011). From the above observation, it is clear that working memory can be considered as the short-lived maintenance and manipulation of information that is not available to the sense anymore. Even though some recently activated representations and sensory after-images can also prevail for a short while without the contribution of sensory output, working memory is preferred when referring to information that is actively and intentionally preserved internally. In fact, some earliest formulations of working memory by researchers described a system where attention serves as a filter of information that will soon become internally maintained (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). However, there are some theories of working memory that have challenged the notion of a distinct system that is dedicated to short-term storage. Scholars who hold this view contend that attention maintains control over the activation of long-term representations of memory for their manipulation over the short-term. Within such postulation, several long-term representations can be activated in working memory, but only one of them gets the focus of attention, which then becomes the subject of present processing (Dell’Acqua, 2010). When one takes the individual differences viewpoint in understanding the dynamics of working memory, some researchers have conceptualized attention control as the fundamental faculty that influences working memory capacity (Alvarez, & Cavanagh, 2004). From all theories that have been created regarding working memory, one constant thing among them is that attention plays a critical role in controlling activation, as well as maintaining and manipulating short-term internal representations. However, a growing majority of current research points to a fact that working memory can conversely affect what gets the maximum attention. Indeed, various theories of visual attention have attempted to describe the way in which internal representations can influence or bias selection (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). For instance, in the framework of guided search as proposed by Carlisle & Woodman, (2011), internal goals- top-down commands, can ascribe greater weights to particular features for purposes of determining areas where attention is deployed. The model of influential biased competition describes ways in which the active maintenance of a component in working memory culminate in the biasing of visual processing that favors items that correlate to other competing components. The model demonstrates that the maintenance of a representation of a given search template promotes the active selection of that object (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). Thus, this is an indication of an adaptive mechanism that narrows attention in a clustered location to find a target object (Clapp, & Gazzaley, 2012). However, there are also indications of the fact those stimuli that match working memory representations may encompass guiding attention even where they are not immediately task-relevant. One notable thing is that internally maintained representations become beneficial when they overlap with the current externally generated endeavor (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). The internally maintained representations are also counter-productive when they are inapplicable to the present externally generated endeavor (Raye, 2007). Working memory and attention thus appear to share content and processes, hence indicating that working memory may best be perceived as some form of attention to internal stimuli. Mechanistically, one can make an assumption that the interaction between internal and external selection mechanisms exist. This is because working memory involves endogenous activation of perpetual long-term memory representations within the sensory context (Chen, & Cowan, 2009). An example of internal stimuli here is the representation of particular shapes of colors by the visual neurons. These representations, in turn, prime the neurons to become more easily activated by the external stimuli that match their preferred features (Saalmann, Pigarev, & Vidyasagar, 2007). Even though, many observations have indicated that external attention control by the internally maintained mechanisms, it is important to know how and when the processing of internal content exerts its influence (Chun, 2011). This processing might, for instance, interfere with the early perception of external stimuli, or precipitate a later decisional bias towards specific items. The understanding of this processing is essential to purposes of clarifying the mechanism that link internal stimuli and external representations, and hence the relationship between working memory and internal stimuli (Fougnie, 2008). If, for example, some irrelevant memory material has a behavioral effect that resembles that of using attention, it would reinforce the idea that working memory representations are similar to internally attended items. Furthermore, it may also enhance the perpetual selection among various competitors (Chun, & Johnson, 2011). It is plausible that even though internally attended representations can influence early perpetual processing as a result of visual feature similarity, they can also influence external attention through more abstract stimulus dimensions. Thus, it becomes clear that memory matching items can impact visual search regardless of whether the working memory cue is presented visually or verbally (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). The efficiency of visual search is affected by the semantic relationship between items of working memory, distracters, and even the attention targets (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). This is similar to the manner in which visual search is affected by comprehension from long-term memory or context (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). Even in situations where working memory and the search stimuli fail to share any features, whether semantic or physical, the task instructions of working memory can still influence a particular intervening attention task. Therefore, just like attention biasing, any actively maintained items can impinge on both the early, as well as the late stages of memory processing. This is in a manner that favors the matching items of a particular environment (Jiang, & Kanwisher, 2003). As demonstrated in the discussion above, it is plausible that whatever gets selected in the prevailing environment has a close correlation with whatever is intended in the internal cognitive environment. These guiding internal stimuli may be items designed for active maintenance in cases where there is no sensory input in the form of working memory (Duncan et.al, 2008). Even though substantial evidence points to the fact that working memory drives attentional selection, several studies have revealed some conditions in which search targets could be protected from, or given control over, the memory contents. Thus, if working memory is symbolic of limited attention resources geared towards internal items for active maintenance (Kiyonaga & Egner, 2014). One would expect that such attention would not be sustained toward internal and then the external domains respectively (Koch, & Tsuchiya, 2007). When it comes to temporal attention, it seems that attention could also be concentrated towards stimuli that appear at varying points in time even in a similar location. Thus, spatial and temporal attention can share several properties, even though they may appear to emerge from independent and dissociable mechanisms. Indeed, a newly emerging perspective points to a fact that the attention blink does not necessarily show some form of capacity limitation (Postle, 2006). Rather, it shows the inhibitory processes that obscure the re-engagement of attention to other elements or temporal loss of control. This assertion is supported by research evidence that shows that the attention engagement can be delayed or even diffused during the attention blink. Additionally, attention blink can be raised through cuing (Wager, & Smith, 2003). This nee standpoint is more conversant with the fact that memory impairments are softened for targets that appear in direct succession. The assertion also reiterates the presence of more formidable links between spatial attention and temporal attention (Sestieri, Shulman, & Corbetta, 2010). In order to form more concise understanding of the relationship between working memory and internal stimuli. It is important to consider how adults encounter deficits on both their attention, as well as working memory capabilities (Raymond, Fenske, & Tavassoli, 2003). Essentially, it has become increasingly evident that attention deficits in older people interact with each other. In regards to this review, it has been shown that impaired selective processes that characterize aging underscore much of the working memory deficits experienced by older individuals. This is further demonstrated by alterations in the neural indicators of top-down modulation as seen throughout the steps of delayed-response task. When it comes to expectation, older people demonstrate deficits in their use of predictive information for purposes of guiding optimal perpetual performance, such as temporal attention (Reynolds, & Chelazzi, 2004). Such age-related deficit shortfall has been linked to the inability of older adults to attain the advantages of working memory through the use of predictive cues as seen in their younger counterparts. In general, these findings can be converged to demonstrate a generalized, age-dependent deficit in top-down modulation. This serves as the inter-link between attention and working memory impairment as individuals get old (Craik, & Salthouse, 2000). In conclusion, it is plausible that several models of working memory often attempt to describe the role of attention. Nevertheless, it seems that there is not much agreement across these models on the actual connection between working memory and internal stimuli. Even though, research work on the relationship between working memory and attention makes assumption that the two concepts depict a unified set of processes. There is tangible evidence showing that the relationship between working memory systems and non-uniform attention. Thus, the understanding of the function of internal stimuli in working memory requires a systematic mapping of the interrelatedness of various aspects of working memory and those that underlie internal stimuli (Fougnie, 2008). In this regard, one can make a conclusion that the interaction between internal stimuli and working memory relies on the stage at which attention is employed. This is as well as the type of information that is being maintained through the working memory. References Alvarez, G., & Cavanagh, P. (2004). The capacity of visual short-term memory is set both by visual information load and by number of objects. Psychology Science, 15 (2),106–11. Awh, E., & Jonides, J. (2001). Overlapping mechanisms of attention and spatial working memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5 (1), 119–126. Awh, E., Vogel, E. K. & Oh, S. H. (2006). Interactions between attention and working memory. Neuroscience, 139 (2), 201–208. Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 4 (3), 829–839. Balani, A. B., Soto, D. & Humphreys, G.W. (2010).Working memory and target-related distractor effects on visual search. Memory and Cognition, 38 (4), 1058–1076. Beck, V. M. Hollingworth, A., & Luck, S. J. (2012). Simultaneous control of attention by multiple working memory representations. Psychological Science, 23 (1), 887–898. Berry, A. (2009). Practice-related improvement in working memory is modulated by changes in processing external interference. Journal of Neurophysiology, 102 (3), 1779–1789 Bollinger, J. (2011). An expectation-based memory deficit in aging. Neuropsychologia, 49 (2), 1466–1475. Carlisle, N. B., & Woodman, G. F. (2011). Automatic and strategic effects in the guidance of attention by working memory representations. Acta Psychologica, 137 (1), 217–225. Chen, Z., & Cowan, N. (2009). How verbal memory loads consume attention. Memory and Cognition, 37 (1), 829–836. Chun, M. M. (2011). Visual working memory as visual attention sustained internally over time. Neuropsychologia, 49 (6), 1407– 1409. Chun, M. M., & Johnson, M. K. (2011). Memory: Enduring traces of perceptual and reflective attention. Neuron, 72 (3), 520–535. Chun, M., & Golomb, J., & Turk-Browne, N. (2011). A Taxonomy of External and Internal Attention. Annual Review of Psychology, 62(1), 73-101. Clapp, W., & Gazzaley, A. (2012). Distinct mechanisms for the impact of distraction and interruption on working memory in aging. Neurobiology & Aging, 33 (1), 134–148. Clapp, W.C. et al. (2010). Mechanisms of working memory disruption by external interference. Cerebral. Cortex, 20 (2), 859–872. Craik, F., & Salthouse, A. (2000). Handbook of Aging and Cognition II, Erlbaum. Dell’Acqua, R. (2010). Orienting attention to objects in visual short-term memory. Neuropsychologia, 48 (2), 419–428. Duncan, J., Parr, A., Woolgar, A., Thompson, R., Bright, P., Cox, S., Bishop, S., & Nimmo-Smith, I. (2008). Goal Neglect and Spearman’s g: Competing Parts of a Complex Task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137 (1), 131-148. Duncan, J., Schramm, M., Thompson, R., & Dumontheil, I, (2012). Task Rules, Working Memory, and Fluid Intelligence. Psychology Bulletin Review, 19 (1), 864-870. Fougnie, D. (2008). The Relationship between Attention and Working Memory. New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc. Gazzaley, A., & Nobre, A. (2011). Top-down Modulation: Bridging Selective Attention and Working Memory. Trends in Cognitive Science, 20 (2), 1-7. Harrison SA, Tong F. 2009. Decoding reveals the contents of visual working memory in early visual areas. Nature, 458 (16), 632–35. Hollingworth, A., & Hwang, S. (2013). The Relationship between Visual Working Memory and Attention: Retention of Precise Color information in the Absence of Effects on Perpetual Selection. Retrieved 13 February 2014 from www.rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org. Jiang YH, Kanwisher, N. (2003). Common neural-mechanisms for response selection and perceptual processing. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 15 (3), 1095–110. Kiyonaga, A., & Egner, T. (2014). Working Memory as Internal Attention: Toward an Integrative Account of Internal and External Selection Processes. NIHPA, 228-242. Koch C, Tsuchiya N. 2007. Attention and consciousness: two distinct brain processes. Trends in Cognitive Science, 11 (2), 6–22. Postle, B. R. (2006). Working memory as an emergent property of the mind and brain. Neuroscience, 139 (4) 23–38. Rabinovick, M., Tristan, I., & Varona, P. (2013). Neural Dynamics of Attentional Cross-Modality Control. PLos ONE, 1371. Raye, C., (2007). Refreshing: a minimal executive function. Cortex, 43 (5), 135–145. Raymond, E, Fenske, J, Tavassoli, T. (2003). Selective attention determines emotional responses to novel visual stimuli. Psychological Science, 14 (4), 537–42. Reynolds, H., & Chelazzi, L. (2004). Attentional modulation of visual processing. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27 (8), 611–647. Saalmann, B., Pigarev, N., & Vidyasagar, R. (2007). Neural mechanisms of visual attention: how top-down feedback highlights relevant locations. Science, 316 (12), 1612–15. Sestieri, C., Shulman, G. L., & Corbetta, M. (2010). Attention to memory and the environment: Functional specialization and dynamic competition in human posterior parietal cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 30 (4), 8445–8456. Wager, T., & Smith, E. (2003). Neuroimaging studies of working memory: a meta-analysis. Cognitive. Affection & Behavioral Neuroscience, 3 (2), 255–74. Wilson, K. (2007). Does attention exist? British Journal of Undergraduate Philosophy, 153-168. Zhanga, B., Zhang, J., Huang, S., Kong, L., & Wang, S. (2011, December 8). Effects of load on the guidance of visual attention from working memory. pp. 2356-2361. Read More