A1 Refereed original research article in a scientific journal
Neural signatures for active maintenance and interference during working memory updating
Authors: Vila-Ballo A, Salmi J, Soveri A, Rodriguez-Fornells A, Lehtonen M, Laine M
Publisher: ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
Publication year: 2018
Journal: Biological Psychology
Journal name in source: BIOLOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY
Journal acronym: BIOL PSYCHOL
Volume: 132
First page : 233
Last page: 243
Number of pages: 11
ISSN: 0301-0511
eISSN: 1873-6246
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2018.01.007
Web address : https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/05E38187065BDFA8AE7D7C3CB22C6CCEA96E887504127BF801C0C44654F61A4DBE65B720CD59FFFA632A14922EE97405
Abstract
Although working memory (WM) is amongst the most studied neurocognitive functions, temporal patterns of its component processes are not fully understood. We examined the neural underpinnings of active maintenance and interference management in the n-back task by manipulating load (1-back vs 3-back) and including so-called lure stimuli. ERPs of 27 young adults revealed that the 1-back condition enabling active maintenance showed a positive slow wave (PSW) prior to the next stimulus (-600-0 ms) and augmented P2 (190-290 ms) and P3b (330-430 ms) responses after the stimulus appeared, albeit the latter effects were driven by the initial PSW. Moreover, PSW amplitude correlated negatively with reaction time in the 1-back condition. Responses to lures showed interference, accompanied with different ERP effects for the two load levels. Our results support the view that PSW reflects efficient WM maintenance and suggest two distinct neuronal correlates for interference in WM.
Although working memory (WM) is amongst the most studied neurocognitive functions, temporal patterns of its component processes are not fully understood. We examined the neural underpinnings of active maintenance and interference management in the n-back task by manipulating load (1-back vs 3-back) and including so-called lure stimuli. ERPs of 27 young adults revealed that the 1-back condition enabling active maintenance showed a positive slow wave (PSW) prior to the next stimulus (-600-0 ms) and augmented P2 (190-290 ms) and P3b (330-430 ms) responses after the stimulus appeared, albeit the latter effects were driven by the initial PSW. Moreover, PSW amplitude correlated negatively with reaction time in the 1-back condition. Responses to lures showed interference, accompanied with different ERP effects for the two load levels. Our results support the view that PSW reflects efficient WM maintenance and suggest two distinct neuronal correlates for interference in WM.
UTU Research Portal