Visual Selection Is Spatially Constrained During Working Memory Consolidation

Abstract

Working memory consolidation (WMC) is known to consume central attentional resources, impairing performance on subsequent attention-demanding tasks. However, the specific nature of this impairment, particularly its effect on the initial stage of visual selection, remains unclear. The current study tested three competing hypotheses: No-suppression, Pure-temporal-suppression, and Spatial-suppression hypotheses. We used a sequential target-matching task where the inter-stimulus interval (ISI) between a target item and a subsequent probe item was varied to modulate the state of consolidation. Experiment 1 revealed that a spatial cue before the probe item failed to guide attention during consolidation (10-ms ISI) but did so effectively after consolidation was complete (1,000-ms ISI), thus ruling out the No-suppression hypothesis. In contrast, Experiment 2 showed that when a larger target item encompassed the cue’s location, the cueing effect was restored during consolidation (0 and 150-ms ISIs), a finding that argues against the Pure-temporal-suppression hypothesis. Taken together, these findings support the Spatial-suppression hypothesis, revealing that visual selection during WMC is governed by an attentional window whose size is flexibly tied to the consolidated representation. This work clarifies the nature of the attentional bottleneck in WMC, reframing it as a spatial phenomenon.

Keywords

visual selection working memory consolidation attentional window spatial cueing effect

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bayliss

D. M.

Bogdanovs

Jarrold

(2015). Consolidating working memory: Distinguishing the effects of consolidation, rehearsal and attentional refreshing in a working memory span task. Journal of Memory and Language, 81, 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.12.004

Belopolsky

A. V.

Theeuwes

(2010). No capture outside the attentional window. Vision Research, 50(23), 2543–2550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2010.08.023

Belopolsky

A. V.

Zwaan

Theeuwes

Kramer

A. F.

(2007). The size of an attentional window modulates attentional capture by color singletons. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(5), 934–938. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194124

Berger

J. O.

Wolpert

R. L.

(1988). The likelihood principle. IMS.

Broadbent

D. E.

Broadbent

M. H. P.

(1987). From detection to identification: Response to multiple targets in rapid serial visual presentation. Perception & Psychophysics, 42(2), 105–113. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03210498

Castiello

Umiltà

(1990). Size of the attentional focus and efficiency of processing. Acta Psychologica, 73(3), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(90)90022-8

Chun

M. M.

Potter

M. C.

(1995). A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 21(1), 109–127. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.21.1.109

Cotton

Ricker

T. J.

(2022). Examining the relationship between working memory consolidation and long-term consolidation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 29(5), 1625–1648. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-022-02084-2

Cunningham

C. A.

Wolfe

J. M.

(2014). The role of object categories in hybrid visual and memory search. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(4), 1585–1599. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036313

10.

Abrams

R. A.

(2009). Onset capture requires attention. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(3), 537–541. https://doi.org/10.3758/pbr.16.3.537

11.

Duncan

Ward

Shapiro

(1994). Direct measurement of attentional dwell time in human vision. Nature, 369(6478), 313–315. https://doi.org/10.1038/369313a0

12.

Gaspelin

Leonard

C. J.

Luck

S. J.

(2015). Direct evidence for active suppression of salient-but-irrelevant sensory inputs. Psychological Science, 26(11), 1740–1750. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615597913

13.

Ghorashi

Enns

J. T.

Spalek

T. M.

Di Lollo

(2009). Spatial cuing does not affect the magnitude of the attentional blink. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(5), 989–993. https://doi.org/10.3758/app.71.5.989

14.

Gmeindl

Jefferies

L. N.

Yantis

(2020). Attention scaling modulates the effective capacity of visual sensory memory. Psychological Research, 84(4), 881–889. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1114-4

15.

JASP Team. (2024). JASP (Version 0.19.1) [Computer software]. https://jasp-stats.org/

16.

Jefferies

L. N.

Lawrence

Conlon

(2023). The spatial extent of focused attention modulates attentional disengagement. Psychological Research, 87(5), 1520–1536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01747-y

17.

Jolicœur

Dell’Acqua

(1998). The demonstration of short-term consolidation. Cognitive Psychology, 36(2), 138–202. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0684

18.

Joseph

J. S.

Chun

M. M.

Nakayama

(1997). Attentional requirements in a ‘preattentive’ feature search task. Nature, 387(6635), 805–807. https://doi.org/10.1038/42940

19.

Karabay

Wilhelm

S. A.

de Jong

Wang

Martens

Akyürek

E. G.

(2022). Two faces of perceptual awareness during the attentional blink: Gradual and discrete. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 151(7), 1520–1541. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001156

20.

Lee

Jeong

S. K.

(2020). Separating the effects of visual working memory load and attentional zoom on selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 46(5), 502–511. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000730

21.

Xin

(2018). Reconceptualizing perceptual load as a rate problem: The role of time in the allocation of selective attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 44(9), 1458–1471. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000547

22.

Xin

Lou

(2019). Visual search may not require target representation in working memory or long-term memory. Psychological Science, 30(10), 1547–1555. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619872749

23.

Morey

R. D.

(2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 4(2), 61–64. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.04.2.p061

24.

Müller

N. G.

Mollenhauer

Rösler

Kleinschmidt

(2005). The attentional field has a Mexican hat distribution. Vision Research, 45(9), 1129–1137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2004.11.003

25.

Niemi

Näätänen

(1981). Foreperiod and simple reaction time. Psychological Bulletin, 89(1), 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.89.1.133

26.

Nieuwenstein

Wyble

(2014). Beyond a mask and against the bottleneck: Retroactive dual-task interference during working memory consolidation of a masked visual target. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(3), 1409-1427. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035257

27.

R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

28.

Raymond

J. E.

Shapiro

K. L.

Arnell

K. M.

(1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(3), 849–860. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.18.3.849

29.

Ricker

T. J.

Hardman

K. O.

(2017). The nature of short-term consolidation in visual working memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146(11), 1551–1573. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000346

30.

Ricker

T. J.

Nieuwenstein

M. R.

Bayliss

D. M.

Barrouillet

(2018). Working memory consolidation: Insights from studies on attention and working memory. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1424(1), 8–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13633

31.

Rouder

J. N.

(2014). Optional stopping: No problem for Bayesians. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(2), 301–308. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0595-4

32.

Schönbrodt

F. D.

Wagenmakers

E.-J.

Zehetleitner

Perugini

(2017). Sequential hypothesis testing with Bayes factors: Efficiently testing mean differences. Psychological Methods, 22(2), 322–339. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000061

33.

Schreij

Owens

Theeuwes

(2008). Abrupt onsets capture attention independent of top-down control settings. Perception & Psychophysics, 70(2), 208–218. https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.2.208

34.

Schreij

Theeuwes

Olivers

C. N. L.

(2010). Abrupt onsets capture attention independent of top-down control settings II: Additivity is no evidence for filtering. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(3), 672–682. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.3.672

35.

Taatgen

N. A.

Juvina

Schipper

Borst

J. P.

Martens

(2009). Too much control can hurt: A threaded cognition model of the attentional blink. Cognitive Psychology, 59(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.12.002

36.

Tamber-Rosenau

B. J.

Kulesz

P. A.

Carlos

B. J.

(2025). Working memory consolidation interruption by forced choice decision is location specific. Journal of Vision, 25(9), 2078–2078. https://doi.org/10.1167/jov.25.9.2078

37.

Theeuwes

(1994). Endogenous and exogenous control of visual selection. Perception, 23(4), 429–440. https://doi.org/10.1068/p230429

38.

Theeuwes

(2023a). The attentional capture debate: When can we avoid salient distractors and when not? Journal of Cognition, 6(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.251

39.

Theeuwes

(2023b). The attentional window, search difficulty and search modes: A reply to commentaries on Theeuwes (2023). Journal of Cognition, 6(1), 40. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.305

40.

Theeuwes

(2025). Attentional capture and control. Annual Review of Psychology, 76, 251–273. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-011624-025340

41.

Theeuwes

De Vries

G.-J.

Godijn

(2003). Attentional and oculomotor capture with static singletons. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(5), 735–746. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194810

42.

van Moorselaar

Theeuwes

Van der Stigchel

. (2025). Alpha-band activity tracks reflexive changes in the breadth of the zoom lens of attention. The Journal of Neuroscience, 45(44), e0706252025. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0706-25.2025

43.

Wolfe

J. M.

(2021). Guided Search 6.0: An updated model of visual search. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(4), 1060–1092. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01859-9

44.

Wright

R. D.

Ward

L. M.

(2008). Orienting of attention. Oxford University Press.

45.

Wyble

Bowman

Nieuwenstein

(2009). The attentional blink provides episodic distinctiveness: Sparing at a cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(3), 787–807. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013902

46.

Yantis

Hillstrom

A. P.

(1994). Stimulus-driven attentional capture: Evidence from equiluminant visual objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(1), 95. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.20.1.95

47.

Zhang

York

A. K.

Jonides

(2025). Attentional capture by abrupt onsets: Foundations and emerging issues. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 51(3), 283–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001275

48.

Zivony

Lamy

(2016). Attentional capture and engagement during the attentional blink: A “camera” metaphor of attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 42(11), 1886–1902. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000286