Pupillary correlates of individual differences in long-term memory

Pupillary correlates of individual differences in n-back task performance

We used pupillometry during a 2-back task to examine individual differences in the intensity and consistency of attention and their relative role in a working memory task. We used sensitivity, or the ability to distinguish targets (2-back matches) and nontargets, as the measure of task performance; task-evoked pupillary responses (TEPRs) as the measure of attentional intensity; and intraindividual pretrial pupil variability as the measure of attentional consistency. TEPRs were greater on target trials compared with nontarget trials, although there was no difference in TEPR magnitude when participants answered correctly or incorrectly to targets. Importantly, this effect interacted with performance: high performers showed a greater separation in their TEPRs between targets and nontargets, whereas there was little difference for low performers. Further, in regression analysis, larger TEPRs on target trials predicted better performance, whereas larger TEPRs on nontarget trials predicted worse performance. Sensitivity positively correlated with average pretrial pupil diameter and negatively correlated with intraindividual variability in pretrial pupil diameter. Overall, we found evidence that both attentional intensity (TEPRs) and consistency (pretrial pupil variation) predict performance on an n-back working memory task.

Baseline pupil diameter does not correlate with fluid intelligence

There has been debate regarding the correlation between baseline/resting state measures of pupil diameter and cognitive abilities such as working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. A positive correlation between baseline pupil diameter and cognitive ability has been cited as evidence for a role of the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine (LC-NE) and its functional connection with cortical networks as a reason for individual differences in fluid intelligence (Tsukahara & Engle, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(46), e2110630118, 2021a). Several recent attempts to replicate this correlation have failed. The current studies make another attempt and find substantial evidence against a positive correlation between pupil diameter and intelligence. Given the data from the current studies in combination with other recent failures to replicate, we conclude that individual differences in baseline pupil diameter should not be used as evidence for a role of the LC-NE system in goal-directed cognitive activity.

Pupillometric evidence for a temporal expectations-based account of persistence under temporal uncertainty

People often quit waiting for delayed rewards when the exact timing of those rewards is uncertain. This behavior often has been attributed to self-control failure. Another possibility is that quitting is the result of a rational decision-making process in the face of uncertainty, based on the decision-maker's expectations about the possible arrival times of the awaited reward. There are forms of temporal expectations (e.g., heavy-tailed) under which the expected time remaining until a reward arrives actually increases as time elapses. In those cases, the rational strategy is to quit waiting when the expected reward is no longer worth the expected time remaining. To arbitrate between the "limited self-control" and "temporal expectations" accounts of persistence, we measured pupil diameter during a persistence task, as a physiological marker of surprise (phasic responses) and effort (pre-decision diameter). Phasic pupil responses were elevated in response to reward receipt. Critically, the extent to which pupils dilated following rewards depended on the delay: people showed larger pupillary surprise responses the more delayed the reward was. This result suggests that people expect the reward less the longer they wait for it-a form of temporal expectations under which limiting persistence is rational. Moreover, predecision pupil diameter before quit events was not associated with how long the participant had been waiting, but rather, depended on how atypical the quit decision was compared with the participant's usual behavior. These data provide physiological evidence for a temporal expectations account of persistence under temporal uncertainty.

Testing locus coeruleus-norepinephrine accounts of working memory, attention control, and fluid intelligence

The current set of studies examined the relationship among working memory capacity, attention control, fluid intelligence, and pupillary correlates of tonic arousal regulation and phasic responsiveness in a combined sample of more than 1,000 participants in two different age ranges (young adults and adolescents). Each study was designed to test predictions made by two recent theories regarding the role of the locus coeruleus-norepinephrine (LC-NE) system in determining individual differences in cognitive ability. The first theory, proposed by Unsworth and Robison (2017a), posits two important individual differences: the moment-to-moment regulation of tonic arousal, and the phasic responsiveness of the system to goal-relevant stimuli. The second theory, proposed by Tsukahara and Engle (2021a), argues that people with higher cognitive abilities have greater functional connectivity between the LC-NE system and cortical networks at rest. These two theories are not mutually exclusive, but they make different predictions. Overall, we found no evidence consistent with a resting-state theory. However, phasic responsiveness was consistently correlated with working memory capacity, attention control, and fluid intelligence, supporting a prediction made by Unsworth and Robison (2017a). Tonic arousal regulation was not correlated with working memory or fluid intelligence and was inconsistently correlated with attention control, which offers only partial support for Unsworth and Robison's (2017a) second prediction.

Readiness to remember: predicting variability in episodic memory

Learning and remembering are fundamental to our lives, so what causes us to forget? Answers often highlight preparatory processes that precede learning, as well as mnemonic processes during the act of encoding or retrieval. Importantly, evidence now indicates that preparatory processes that precede retrieval attempts also have powerful influences on memory success or failure. Here, we review recent work from neuroimaging, electroencephalography, pupillometry, and behavioral science to propose an integrative framework of retrieval-period dynamics that explains variance in remembering in the moment and across individuals as a function of interactions among preparatory attention, goal coding, and mnemonic processes. Extending this approach, we consider how a 'readiness to remember' (R2R) framework explains variance in high-level functions of memory and mnemonic disruptions in aging.