Remembering more than you can say: Re-examining “amnesia” of attended attributes
Attribute amnesia (AA) describes a phenomenon whereby observers fail a surprise memory test which asks them to report an attribute they had just attended and used to fulfil a task goal. This finding has cast doubt on the prominent theory that attention results in encoding into working memory (WM), t...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Acta psychologica 2021-03, Vol.214, p.103265-103265, Article 103265 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Attribute amnesia (AA) describes a phenomenon whereby observers fail a surprise memory test which asks them to report an attribute they had just attended and used to fulfil a task goal. This finding has cast doubt on the prominent theory that attention results in encoding into working memory (WM), to which two competing explanations have been proposed: (1) task demands dictate whether attended information is encoded into WM, and (2) attended information is encoded in a weak state that does not survive the demands of the surprise memory test. To address this debate our study circumvented the limitations of a surprise memory test by embedding a second search task within a typical color-based AA search task. The search task was modified so that the attended attribute would reappear in the second search as either the target, a distractor, or not at all. Critically, our results support encoding of the attended attribute in WM though to a weaker extent than the attribute that is required for report. A second experiment confirmed that WM encoding only occurs for the attended attribute, though distractor attributes produce a bias consistent with negative priming. Our data provide novel support for a theory of memory consolidation that links the strength of a memory's representation with expectations for how it will be used in a task. Implications for the utility of this procedure in future investigations previously limited by single trial data (i.e., surprise question methodology) are discussed.
•Attended attributes influence search behaviour in secondary search task.•Failure of explicit report persists despite attribute's encoding in working memory.•New method to examine the mnemonic properties of attributes not required for report. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0001-6918 1873-6297 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103265 |