Perceptual attention and working memory are distinct entities that causally affect each other¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? The extreme position that WM and perceptual attention are the same is almost certainly wrong, as attended stimuli can leave little trace in WM and perceptual attention to stimuli during retention leads to less interference than adding them to WM. → Oberauer 2019
Evidence¶
Oberauer 2019¶
Oberauer, K. (2019). Working Memory and Attention – A Conceptual Analysis and Review. Journal of Cognition, 2(1): 36. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.58
q2 · i? · review · r3
The review's assessment of the identity position that WM and perceptual attention are the same. Supporting evidence includes: perceptual attention during retention leads to less interference than adding stimuli to WM (Fougnie & Marois, 2006), attended stimuli leave hardly any trace in WM (Chen & Wyble; Oberauer, 2018), and only partial overlap in LPFC neurons responding to attended versus held features. The position is "almost certainly wrong".
"This extreme position is attractive due to its parsimony, but it is almost certainly wrong"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Processing of affective stimuli is prioritized and interferes with target processing during the attentional blink interval in early adolescence — related
- Perceptual attention is probably necessary but not sufficient for encoding stimuli into working memory — related
- Early (within ~100 ms) attentional modulation during encoding predicts subsequent working memory accuracy — related
- Selective attention facilitates working memory retrieval, and selecting from WM resembles visual search — related
- rTMS of right IFJ causally reduces top-down modulation during encoding and working memory accuracy — related
- Evidence that perceptual attention and WM maintenance share a limited resource is not yet convincing — related
- Predictive cues aid transfer of perceptual representations into working memory via pre-encoding top-down modulation — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
wm-perceptual-attention-distinct-entities |
title |
Perceptual attention and working memory are distinct entities that causally affect each other |
description |
Perceptual attention and working memory are distinct entities that causally affect each other |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2019 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-16 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — oberauer-2019 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.