Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing

The comparison of memory performance during free and fixed viewing conditions has been used to demonstrate the involvement of eye movements in memory encoding and retrieval, with stronger effects at encoding than retrieval. Relative to conditions of free viewing, participants generally show reduced...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Michael J. Armson, Jennifer D. Ryan, Brian Levine
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PeerJ Inc. 2019-04-01
Series:PeerJ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://peerj.com/articles/6839.pdf
_version_ 1797418943155011584
author Michael J. Armson
Jennifer D. Ryan
Brian Levine
author_facet Michael J. Armson
Jennifer D. Ryan
Brian Levine
author_sort Michael J. Armson
collection DOAJ
description The comparison of memory performance during free and fixed viewing conditions has been used to demonstrate the involvement of eye movements in memory encoding and retrieval, with stronger effects at encoding than retrieval. Relative to conditions of free viewing, participants generally show reduced memory performance following sustained fixation, suggesting that unrestricted eye movements benefit memory. However, the cognitive basis of the memory reduction during fixed viewing is uncertain, with possible mechanisms including disruption of visual-mnemonic and/or imagery processes with sustained fixation, or greater working memory demands required for fixed relative to free viewing. To investigate one possible mechanism for this reduction, we had participants perform a working memory task—an auditory n-back task—during free and fixed viewing, as well as a repetitive finger tapping condition, included to isolate the effects of motor interference independent of the oculomotor system. As expected, finger tapping significantly interfered with n-back performance relative to free viewing, as indexed by a decrease in accuracy and increase in response times. By contrast, there was no evidence that fixed viewing interfered with n-back performance relative to free viewing. Our findings failed to support a hypothesis of increased working memory load during fixation. They are consistent with the notion that fixation disrupts long-term memory performance through interference with visual processes.
first_indexed 2024-03-09T06:40:16Z
format Article
id doaj.art-70d3b17d9d7d49569fba5d8ca3c2f401
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2167-8359
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-09T06:40:16Z
publishDate 2019-04-01
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format Article
series PeerJ
spelling doaj.art-70d3b17d9d7d49569fba5d8ca3c2f4012023-12-03T10:51:38ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592019-04-017e683910.7717/peerj.6839Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewingMichael J. Armson0Jennifer D. Ryan1Brian Levine2Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRotman Research Institute, Baycrest Health Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, CanadaThe comparison of memory performance during free and fixed viewing conditions has been used to demonstrate the involvement of eye movements in memory encoding and retrieval, with stronger effects at encoding than retrieval. Relative to conditions of free viewing, participants generally show reduced memory performance following sustained fixation, suggesting that unrestricted eye movements benefit memory. However, the cognitive basis of the memory reduction during fixed viewing is uncertain, with possible mechanisms including disruption of visual-mnemonic and/or imagery processes with sustained fixation, or greater working memory demands required for fixed relative to free viewing. To investigate one possible mechanism for this reduction, we had participants perform a working memory task—an auditory n-back task—during free and fixed viewing, as well as a repetitive finger tapping condition, included to isolate the effects of motor interference independent of the oculomotor system. As expected, finger tapping significantly interfered with n-back performance relative to free viewing, as indexed by a decrease in accuracy and increase in response times. By contrast, there was no evidence that fixed viewing interfered with n-back performance relative to free viewing. Our findings failed to support a hypothesis of increased working memory load during fixation. They are consistent with the notion that fixation disrupts long-term memory performance through interference with visual processes.https://peerj.com/articles/6839.pdfEye movementsMemoryWorking memoryLong-term memoryFree viewingFixation
spellingShingle Michael J. Armson
Jennifer D. Ryan
Brian Levine
Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
PeerJ
Eye movements
Memory
Working memory
Long-term memory
Free viewing
Fixation
title Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
title_full Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
title_fullStr Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
title_full_unstemmed Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
title_short Maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
title_sort maintaining fixation does not increase demands on working memory relative to free viewing
topic Eye movements
Memory
Working memory
Long-term memory
Free viewing
Fixation
url https://peerj.com/articles/6839.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT michaeljarmson maintainingfixationdoesnotincreasedemandsonworkingmemoryrelativetofreeviewing
AT jenniferdryan maintainingfixationdoesnotincreasedemandsonworkingmemoryrelativetofreeviewing
AT brianlevine maintainingfixationdoesnotincreasedemandsonworkingmemoryrelativetofreeviewing