4.7 Article

Neural evidence for categorical biases in location and orientation representations in a working memory task

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 240, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118366

Keywords

EEG decoding; Categorical bias; Visual working memory

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study showed that visual representations in working memory are influenced by the categorical structure of the stimulus space. Analysis of EEG data revealed that biases in working memory representations exist prior to the report, rather than arising during decision or response processes. Follow-up experiments further confirmed these findings.
Previous research demonstrated that visual representations in working memory exhibit biases with respect to the categorical structure of the stimulus space. However, a majority of those studies used behavioral measures of working memory, and it is not clear whether the working memory representations per se are influenced by the categorical structure or whether the biases arise in decision or response processes during the report. Here, I applied a multivariate decoding technique to EEG data collected during working memory tasks to determine whether neural activity associated with the representations in working memory is categorically biased prior to the report. I found that the decoding of spatial working memory was biased away from the nearest cardinal location, consistent with the biases observed in the behavioral responses. In a follow-up experiment which was designed to prevent the use of a response preparation strategy, I found that the decoding still exhibited categorical biases. Together, these results provide neural evidence that working memory representations themselves are categorically biased, imposing important constraints on the models of working memory representations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available