The effects of encoding instruction and opportunity on the recollection of behaviourally relevant events

The effect of target detection task on memory encoding varies in different stimulus onset asynchronies

The attentional boost effect (ABE) and action-induced memory enhancement (AIME) suggest that memory performance for target-paired items is superior to that for distractor-paired items when participants performed a target detection task and a memory encoding task simultaneously. Though the memory enhancement has been well established, the temporal dynamics of how the target detection task influenced memory encoding remains unclear. To investigate this, we manipulated the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between detection stimuli and the words to be memorized using a remember/know study-test paradigm, and we focused primarily on memory performance for the words that appeared after the detection response. The results showed that target-paired memory enhancement was robust from SOA = 0 s to SOA = 0.75 s, but was not significant when examined by itself in Experiment 1A or weakened in Experiment 2 and the conjoint analysis when SOA = 1 s, which were only observed in R responses. The post-response memory enhancement still existed when there was no temporal overlap between the word and target, similar to the magnitude of memory enhancement observed with temporal overlap. These results supported the view that target-paired memory enhancement (recollection rather than familiarity) occurred irrespective of whether the items appeared simultaneously with the targets or within a short period after the response, and the temporal overlap of the word and target was not necessary for post-response memory enhancement.

The Attentional Boost Effect in Older Adults: Examining the Vulnerable Boost Hypothesis

INTRODUCTION

The Attentional Boost Effect (ABE) occurs whenever participants recognize stimuli paired earlier with to-be-responded targets better than stimuli earlier paired with to-be-ignored distractors or presented on their own (baseline). Previous studies showed that the ABE does not occur in older adults when the encoding time is too short (500 ms/word) or when encoding is incidental, likely due to aging-related reductions in cognitive resources or limitations of processing speed.

METHOD

In the present study, younger and older adults encoded words presented for 1000 ms under intentional instructions. In addition, to determine the potential impact of the retention interval, the recognition task was performed after a delay of 2 minutes (Experiment 1) or 20 minutes (Experiment 2).

RESULTS

Under these conditions, older adults showed a significant ABE and the size of the effect was comparable to that achieved by younger adults. The magnitude of the ABE was vulnerable to the passage of time because the recognition advantage of target-paired words decreased sharply from 2 to 20 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Taken together, our data demonstrate that younger and older adults may have comparable ABE effects under specific conditions and are similarly sensitive to interference.

The attentional boost effect in free recall dynamics

With the attentional boost effect (ABE), responding to a briefly presented target in a detection task enhances the encoding of other items presented at the same time. However, the effects of target detection on context memory for the event in which the stimulus appeared remain unclear. Here, we present findings from verbal free recall and recognition experiments that test the effects of target detection during encoding on temporal and relational aspects of context memory. Consistent with prior demonstrations of limited effects of target detection on context memory, in Experiment 1 there was no evidence that target detection influenced the likelihood of transitioning to items that were presented at similar times during encoding, or that were in the same encoding condition. These null effects were replicated in a second experiment, which added an old/new recognition and relational memory test. These results indicate that target detection during encoding has minimal effects on the formation of temporal associations between words in memory.

The attentional boost effect overcomes dual-task interference in choice-response tasks

Dual-task interference often arises when people respond to an incoming stimulus according to an arbitrary rule, such as choosing between the gas pedal and the brake when driving. Severe interference from response selection yields a brief "Psychological Refractory Period," during which a concurrent task is put on hold. Here, we show that response selection in one task does not always hamper the processing of a secondary task. Responding to a target may paradoxically enhance the processing of secondary tasks, even when the target requires complex response selection. In three experiments, participants encoded pictures of common objects to memory while simultaneously monitoring a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) of characters or colours. Some of the RSVP stimuli were targets, requiring participants to press one of the two buttons to report their identity; others were distractors that participants ignored. Despite the increased response selection demands on target trials, pictures encoded with the RSVP targets were better remembered than those encoded with the RSVP distractors. Contrary to previous reports and predictions from dual-task interference, the attentional boost from target detection overcomes increased interference from response selection.

Motor engagement enhances incidental memory for task-irrelevant items

Actions shape what we see and memorize. A previous study suggested the interaction between motor and memory systems by showing that memory encoding for task-irrelevant items was enhanced when presented with motor-response cues. However, in the studies on the attentional boost effect, it has been revealed that detection of the target stimulus can lead to memory enhancement without requiring overt action. Thus, the direct link between the action and memory remains unclear. To exclude the effect of the target detection process as a potential confounder, this study assessed the benefit of action for memory by separating items from the response cue in time. In our pre-registered online experiment (N = 142), participants responded to visual Go cues by pressing a key (i.e., motor task) or counting (i.e., motor-neutral cognitive task) while ignoring No-go cues. In each trial, two task-irrelevant images were sequentially presented after the cue disappearance. After encoding the Go/No-go tasks, participants performed a surprise recognition memory test for those images. Importantly, we quantified the impact of overt execution of the action by comparing memories with and without motor response and the impact of covert motor processes (e.g., preparation and planning of action) by comparing memory between the motor and cognitive tasks. The results showed no memory differences between Go and No-go trials in the motor task. This means that the execution itself was not critical for memory enhancement. However, the memory performance in the motor No-go trials was higher than that in the cognitive No-go trials, only for the items presented away from the cues in time. Therefore, engaging the motor task itself could increase incidental memory for the task-irrelevant items compared to a passive viewing situation. We added empirical evidence on the online interaction between action and memory encoding. These memory advantages could be especially brought in action preparation and planning. We believe this fact may expand our present understanding of everyday memory, such as active learning.

Grounding the Attentional Boost Effect in Events and the Efficient Brain

Attention and memory for everyday experiences vary over time, wherein some moments are better attended and subsequently better remembered than others. These effects have been demonstrated in naturalistic viewing tasks with complex and relatively uncontrolled stimuli, as well as in more controlled laboratory tasks with simpler stimuli. For example, in the attentional boost effect (ABE), participants perform two tasks at once: memorizing a series of briefly presented stimuli (e.g., pictures of outdoor scenes) for a later memory test, and responding to other concurrently presented cues that meet pre-defined criteria (e.g., participants press a button for a blue target square and do nothing for a red distractor square). However, rather than increasing dual-task interference, attending to a target cue boosts, rather than impairs, subsequent memory for concurrently presented information. In this review we describe current data on the extent and limitations of the attentional boost effect and whether it may be related to activity in the locus coeruleus neuromodulatory system. We suggest that insight into the mechanisms that produce the attentional boost effect may be found in recent advances in the locus coeruleus literature and from understanding of how the neurocognitive system handles stability and change in everyday events. We consequently propose updates to an early account of the attentional boost effect, the dual-task interaction model, to better ground it in what is currently known about event cognition and the role that the LC plays in regulating brain states.

The attentional boost effect facilitates the encoding of contextual details: New evidence with verbal materials and a modified recognition task

In the attentional boost effect (ABE), words or images encoded with to-be-responded targets are later recalled better than words or images encoded with to-be-ignored distractors. The ABE has been repeatedly demonstrated to improve item memory, whereas evidence concerning contextual memory is mixed, with studies showing both significant and null results. The present three experiments investigated whether the ABE could enhance contextual memory when using a recognition task that allowed participants to reinstate the original study context, by simultaneously manipulating the nature of the instructions provided at encoding. Participants studied a sequence of colored words paired with target (gray circles) or distractor (gray squares) stimuli, under the instructions to remember either the words and their colors (Exps. 1–2) or only the words (Exp. 3) and simultaneously press the space bar whenever a gray circle appeared on the screen. Then, after a brief interval, they were administered a modified recognition task involving two successive stages. First, participants were presented with two different words and had to decide which word was originally encoded; second, they were presented with five colored versions of the (correct) old words and had to remember the color in which they were studied. Results converged in showing that the ABE enhanced contextual memory, although the effect was more robust with intentional encoding instructions.

Auditory Target Detection Enhances Visual Processing and Hippocampal Functional Connectivity

Though dividing one's attention between two input streams typically impairs performance, detecting a behaviorally relevant stimulus can sometimes enhance the encoding of unrelated information presented at the same time. Previous research has shown that selection of this kind boosts visual cortical activity and memory for concurrent items. An important unanswered question is whether such effects are reflected in processing quality and functional connectivity in visual regions and in the hippocampus. In this fMRI study, participants were asked to memorize a stream of naturalistic images and press a button only when they heard a predefined target tone (400 or 1,200 Hz, counterbalanced). Images could be presented with a target tone, with a distractor tone, or without a tone. Auditory target detection increased activity throughout the ventral visual cortex but lowered it in the hippocampus. Enhancements in functional connectivity between the ventral visual cortex and the hippocampus were also observed following auditory targets. Multi-voxel pattern classification of image category was more accurate on target tone trials than on distractor and no tone trials in the fusiform gyrus and parahippocampal gyrus. This effect was stronger in visual cortical clusters whose activity was more correlated with the hippocampus on target tone than on distractor tone trials. In agreement with accounts suggesting that subcortical noradrenergic influences play a role in the attentional boost effect, auditory target detection also caused an increase in locus coeruleus activity and phasic pupil responses. These findings outline a network of cortical and subcortical regions that are involved in the selection and processing of information presented at behaviorally relevant moments.

Does the Attentional Boost Effect Depend on the Intentionality of Encoding? Investigating the Mechanisms Underlying Memory for Visual Objects Presented at Behaviorally Relevant Moments in Time

Pictures in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) stream are better remembered when they are simultaneously presented with targets of an unrelated detection task than when they are presented with distractors. However, it is unclear whether this so-called “attentional boost effect” depends on the intentionality of encoding. While there are studies suggesting that the attentional boost effect even occurs when encoding is incidental, there are several methodological issues with these studies, which may have undermined the incidental encoding instructions. The present study (N = 141) investigated the role of the intentionality of encoding with an improved experimental design. Specifically, to prevent a spill-over of intentional resources to the pictures in the RSVP stream, the speed of the stream was increased (to four pictures per second) and each picture was presented only once during the course of the experiment. An attentional boost effect was only found when encoding was intentional but not when encoding was incidental. Interestingly, memory performance for incidentally encoded pictures was nevertheless substantially above chance, independently of whether images were presented with search-relevant targets or distractors. These results suggest that the attentional boost effect is a memory advantage that occurs only under intentional encoding conditions, and that perceptual long-term memory representations are formed as a natural product of perception, independently of the presence of behaviorally relevant events.