1 / 4

Interaction of Working Memory Load and Response-Competing Distraction

Interaction of Working Memory Load and Response-Competing Distraction. Todd Kelley & Nilli Lavie. Rationale. Previous work has shown that working memory (WM) load increases neural activity related to task-irrelevant faces (De Fockert et al., 2001) in face-selective areas (e.g. FFA).

makani
Download Presentation

Interaction of Working Memory Load and Response-Competing Distraction

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Interaction of Working Memory Load and Response-Competing Distraction Todd Kelley & Nilli Lavie

  2. Rationale • Previous work has shown that working memory (WM) load increases neural activity related to task-irrelevant faces (De Fockert et al., 2001) in face-selective areas (e.g. FFA). • Proposed study: examine whether this modulation by WM load occur early (retinotopic cortex including V1) or (and) late (areas that relate to response competition, e.g. parietal cortex). • Use response-competition (flanker) paradigm involving object categorization.

  3. Stimuli and Design • WM task: digit recall and matching • Low Load: hold 1 digit in memory • High Load: hold 6 digits in memory • Categorization task: fruit or household object • Flanker appears to left or right of target item on %50 of trials • Trial Layout: + + 264197 4 200 ms 0-2 s 1 s 2 s 1800 ms 3 s

  4. Data Collection & Analysis • 20 adult subjects (m/f, ages 18-55) • 4 WML scans; 2 scans per load condition; Scan length: 480 s. • 12 s of fixation at beginning and end of each scan • 9.5 s per trial (trials last 8-10 s; ITI = 0.5) • 48 trials/block • 2-3 meridian mapping scans; 2 LOC localizer scans • Full brain coverage; TR = 3 s; TE = 50 ms; 3mm cubic voxels • Interaction of WM load (high-low) and distractor (present-absent, including retinotopy) • Interaction of WM load (high-low) and response competition (incongruent -congruent distractor conditions)

More Related