Sign in
NeuroscienceFrontiers in Neuroscience
Peer-reviewed journal article

Electrophysiological hallmarks for event relations and event roles in working memory

Xinchi YuiD, Jialu LiiD, Hao ZhuiD, Xing TianiD, Ellen F. LauiD

Abstract

The ability to maintain events (i.e. interactions between/among objects) in working memory is crucial for our everyday cognition, yet the format of this representation is poorly understood. The current ERP study was designed to answer two questions: How is maintaining events (e.g., the tiger hit the lion) neurally different from maintaining item coordinations (e.g., the tiger and the lion)? That is, how is the event relation (present in events but not coordinations) represented? And how is the agent, or initiator of the event encoded differently from the patient, or receiver of the event during maintenance? We used a novel picture-sentence match-across-delay approach in which the working memory representation was pinged during the delay, in two ERP experiments with Chinese and English materials. First, we found that maintenance of events elicited a long-lasting late sustained difference in posterior-occipital electrodes relative to non-events. This effect resembled the negative slow wave reported in previous studies of working memory, suggesting that the maintenance of events in working memory may impose a higher cost compared to coordinations. Second, in order to elicit a hallmark for agent vs. patient representation in working memory, we pinged agent or patient characters during the delay. Although planned comparisons did not reveal significant differences in the ERPs elicited by the agent pings vs. patient pings, we found that the ping appeared to dampen the ongoing sustained difference, suggesting a shift from sustained activity to activity silent mechanisms. These results represent one of the uses of ERPs to elucidates the format of neural representation for events in working memory.

PDFDOI

02 /Specification & Classification

Click any tag to browse matching papers
Citations
6
FWCI
1.22
Field percentile
top 26%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.