Examining the influence of action on spatial working memory: the importance of selection

Effects of pointing movements on visuospatial working memory in a joint-action condition: Evidence from eye movements

Previous studies showed that (a) performing pointing movements towards to-be-remembered locations enhanced their later recognition, and (b) in a joint-action condition, experimenter-performed pointing movements benefited memory to the same extent as self-performed movements. The present study replicated these findings and additionally recorded participants’ fixations towards studied arrays. Each trial involved the presentation of two consecutive spatial arrays, where each item occupied a different spatial location. The item locations of one array were encoded by mere visual observation (the no-move array), whereas the locations of the other array were encoded by observation plus pointing movements (the move array). Critically, in Experiment 1, participants took turns with the experimenter in pointing towards the move arrays (joint-action condition), while in Experiment 2 pointing was performed only by the experimenter (passive condition). The results showed that the locations of move arrays were recognized better than the locations of no-move arrays in Experiment 1, but not in Experiment 2. The pattern of eye-fixations was in line with behavioral findings, indicating that in Experiment 1, fixations to the locations of move arrays were higher in number and longer in duration than fixations to the locations of no-move arrays, irrespective of the agent who performed the movements. In contrast, no differences emerged in Experiment 2. We propose that, in the joint-action condition, self- and other-performed pointing movements are coded at the same representational level and their functional equivalency is reflected in a similar pattern of eye-fixations.

On-item fixations during serial encoding do not affect spatial working memory

Ample evidence suggests that there is overlap between the eye-movement system and spatial working memory. Such overlapping structures or capacities may result in interference on the one hand and beneficial support on the other. We investigated eye-movement control during encoding of verbal or spatial information, keeping the display the same between tasks. Saccades to to-be-encoded items were scarce during spatial encoding in comparison with verbal encoding. However, despite replicating this difference across different tasks (serial, free recall) and presentation modalities (simultaneous, sequential presentation), we found no relation between item fixations and memory performance-that is, no costs or benefits. Inducing a change from covert to overt encoding did not affect spatial memory performance as well. In contrast, regressive fixations on prior items, that were no longer on the screen, were associated with increased spatial memory performance. Regressions occurred mainly at the end of the encoding period and were targeted at the first presented item. Our results suggest a dissociation between two types of fixations that accompany serial spatial memory: On-item fixations are epiphenomenal; regressions indicate rehearsal or output preparation.

Pointing movements and visuo-spatial working memory in a joint setting: the role of motor inhibition

Previous studies have shown that, under specific conditions, arrays that have been pointed at encoding are recognized better than passively viewed ones. According to one interpretation, the superior recognition of pointed-to arrays can be explained by the motor inhibition of passively viewed arrays. The present study sought to determine whether a similar motor inhibition can be induced also when the participants observed a co-actor perform the pointing movements. Participants were presented with two spatial arrays, one of which was encoded via observation only (the no-move array), while the other was encoded with pointing movements (the move array); movements were performed either by the participant or by the experimenter. Experiment 1 replicated the advantage of self-pointed arrays over passively viewed arrays. Experiment 2 showed that, when participants passively observed the pointing movements performed by the experimenter, move arrays were recognized no better than no-move arrays. Finally, Experiment 3 demonstrated that, in a joint-action condition in which participants alternated with the experimenter in making pointing movements, the advantage of experimenter-pointed arrays over passively viewed arrays was significant and similar in size to the advantage produced by self-performed movements. Importantly, a series of cross-experiment comparisons indicated that the higher recognition of both self- and experimenter-pointed arrays in Experiment 3 could be explained by the motor inhibition of no-move arrays. We propose that, in a joint condition, the pointing movements performed by the experimenter were represented in the same functional way as self-performed movements and that this produced the motor inhibition of passively viewed arrays.

Pointing movements both impair and improve visuospatial working memory depending on serial position

Two experiments investigated the effects of pointing movements on the item and order recall of random, horizontal, and vertical arrays consisting of 6 and 7 squares (Experiment 1) or 8 and 9 squares (Experiment 2). In the encoding phase, participants either viewed the items passively (passive-view condition) or pointed towards them (pointing condition). Then, after a brief interval, they were requested to recall the locations of the studied squares in the correct order of presentation. The critical result was that, for all types of arrays, the effects of the encoding condition varied as a function of serial position: for the initial and central positions accuracy was higher in the passive-view than in the pointing condition (confirming the standard inhibitory effect of pointing movements on visuospatial working memory), whereas the reverse pattern occurred in the final positions-showing a significant advantage of the pointing condition over the passive-view condition. Findings are interpreted as showing that pointing can have two simultaneous effects on the recall of spatial locations, a positive one due to the addition of a motor code and a negative one due to the attentional requirements of hand movements, with the net impact on serial recall depending on the amount of attention resources needed for the encoding of each position. Implications for the item-order hypothesis and the perceptual-gestural account of working memory are also discussed.

The effects of task-relevant saccadic eye movements performed during the encoding of a serial sequence on visuospatial memory performance

Visuospatial working memory (VSWM) is a set of cognitive processes used to encode, maintain and manipulate spatial information. One important feature of VSWM is that it has a limited capacity such that only few items can be actively stored and manipulated simultaneously. Given the limited capacity, it is important to determine the conditions that affect memory performance as this will improve our understanding of the architecture and function of VSWM. Previous studies have shown that VSWM is disrupted when task-irrelevant eye movements are performed during the maintenance phase; however, relatively fewer studies examined the role of eye movements performed during the encoding phase. On one hand, performing eye movements during the encoding phase could result in a stronger memory trace because the memory formation is reinforced by the activation of the motor system. On the other hand, performing eye movements to each target could disrupt the configural processing of the spatial array because the spatial representation has to be updated with each movement to maintain perceptual stability. Therefore, this work was conducted to examine whether task-relevant saccadic eye movements performed during the encoding phase of a visuospatial working memory task affect the recall of serially presented targets. Results from two experiments showed that average recall accuracy was significantly higher when the spatial array (set size ≥ 7) was encoded using a covert strategy-that is, while participants fixated on a central target, in comparison to an overt strategy-that is, while participants moved their eyes to fixate on each target. Furthermore, the improvement in accuracy was evident only for targets presented in the first half of the sequence, suggesting that the primacy effect is modulated by the presence of eye movements. We propose that executing saccades during encoding could interfere with the ability to use a chunking strategy or disrupt active visualization of the configuration. In conclusion, this is the first study to show that task-relevant saccadic eye movements performed during encoding may actually reduce the spatial span of VSWM. These results extend the current knowledge about the role of eye movements in VSWM, and have implications for future studies investigating the VSWM.