Abstract

The capacity of working memory is limited and this limit is comparable in crows and primates. To maximize this resource, humans use attention to select only relevant information for maintenance. Interestingly, attention-cues are effective not only before but also after the presentation of to-be-remembered stimuli, highlighting control mechanisms beyond sensory selection. Here we explore if crows are also capable of these forms of control over working memory. Two crows (Corvus corone) were trained to memorize two, four or six visual stimuli. Comparable to our previous results, the crows showed a decrease in performance with increasing working memory load. Using attention cues, we indicated the critical stimulus on a given trial. These cues were either presented before (pre-cue) or after sample-presentation (retro-cue). On other trials no cue was given as to which stimulus was critical. We found that both pre- and retro-cues enhance the performance of the birds. These results show that crows, like humans, can utilize attention to select relevant stimuli for maintenance in working memory. Importantly, crows can also utilize cues to make the most of their working memory capacity even after the stimuli are already held in working memory. This strongly implies that crows can engage in efficient control over working memory.

Highlights

  • The capacity of working memory is limited and this limit is comparable in crows and primates

  • Like pre-cues, such ‘retro-cues’ increase the retention of cued material albeit to a lesser extent[25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. Since this effect cannot be driven by sensory gate-keeping it must rely on some form of control mechanism that acts on information that is already maintained in Working memory (WM)

  • Both birds benefited from the presence of cues: both pre and retro-cue significantly increased the performance compared to the no-cue condition (Fig. 2A; ANOVA FRN: F(2, 54) = 31.71, p < 0.001; JRO: F(2, 54) = 38.71, p < 0.001; post-hoc test: no-cue: FRN M = 66.8 SD = 6.19; JRO M = 64.2 SD = 5.31; pre-cue FRN M = 81.0 SD = 4.88; JRO: M = 81.3 SD = 7.74; retro-cue FRN: M = 75.5 SD = 6.41; JRO M = 71.5 SD = 6.01) with a memory load effect

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The capacity of working memory is limited and this limit is comparable in crows and primates. We found that both pre- and retro-cues enhance the performance of the birds These results show that crows, like humans, can utilize attention to select relevant stimuli for maintenance in working memory. Like pre-cues, such ‘retro-cues’ increase the retention of cued material albeit to a lesser extent[25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33] Since this effect cannot be driven by sensory gate-keeping it must rely on some form of control mechanism that acts on information that is already maintained in WM. In directed forgetting paradigms, cues instruct the subjects if a memorized stimulus will later be tested or if a test is omitted While such ‘forget-cues’ result in a dramatic decline in recognition, it is not fully resolved if this reflects executive control or if the results can be explained by simpler mechanisms such as motivational differences[59,60]. A directed forgetting procedure cannot directly asses the modulation of WM capacity

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call