Translate 
Abstract
Abstract Refreshing is assumed to reactivate the contents of working memory in an attention-based way, resulting in a boost of the attended representations and hence improving their subsequent memory. Here, we examined whether the refreshing-induced memory boost is a constant or a gradual, time-dependent phenomenon. If the beneficial effect of refreshing on memory performance is due to the information being selected for refreshing (i.e., selection hypothesis), a constant memory boost is expected to occur each time an item is selected for refreshing, with better memory performance for items that are selected more often. If, however, the beneficial effect of refreshing on memory performance is due to spending time in the focus of attention during refreshing (i.e., duration hypothesis), a gradual memory boost is expected, with the size of the memory boost being a direct function of how long the item has been the object of focused attention. To distinguish between these hypotheses, we instructed and guided the use of refreshing during retention through the presentation of cues, and varied the number of refreshing steps and their duration independently. The number of refreshing steps, but not their duration, had an effect on recall, in agreement with the selection hypothesis. However, some of the results were less robust than anticipated, indicating that the effect of instructed refreshing is limited to certain task parameters.
Highlights
Refreshing has been proposed as a domain-general maintenance process in working memory, relying on central attention to reactivate the content of working memory (e.g., Barrouillet et al, 2007; Johnson, 1992; Souza et al, 2018; Vergauwe et al, 2014)
It appears that the effect of refreshing on recall error is entirely due to the number of refreshing steps, as lengthening the duration of each refreshing step from 500 to 1,000 ms did not have an effect on recall error
Assessing the contribution of the number of refreshing steps versus the duration of each refreshing step showed that the memory boost induced by instructed refreshing was explained solely by the number of refreshing steps; extending the duration of each refreshing step from 500 to 1,000 ms did not affect recall error
Summary
The ability to keep information in mind over the short term is crucial for cognition. Refreshing is one of the key processes that has been proposed to support short-term maintenance, using attention to reactivate the contents of working memory (see Camos et al, 2018, for a review). Refreshing has been proposed as a domain-general maintenance process in working memory, relying on central attention to reactivate the content of working memory (e.g., Barrouillet et al, 2007; Johnson, 1992; Souza et al, 2018; Vergauwe et al, 2014). During refreshing, working memory representations are assumed to be reactivated by the focus of attention being directed at them, one by one, in their order of presentation (e.g., Barrouillet & Camos, 2012; Cowan, 1995; Higgins & Johnson, 2009; Vergauwe & Cowan, 2014; but see Portrat & Lemaire, 2015, for an alternative view). In line with the notion that refreshing results in increased accessibility of the refreshed information, recent studies have shown that, right after refreshing a particular memory item, response times are fast for memory probes that match
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Paper version not known (
Free)
Published Version
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
