Transformed visual working memory representations in human occipitotemporal and posterior parietal cortices.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
eNeuro Pub Date : 2025-06-05 DOI:10.1523/ENEURO.0162-25.2025
Yaoda Xu
{"title":"Transformed visual working memory representations in human occipitotemporal and posterior parietal cortices.","authors":"Yaoda Xu","doi":"10.1523/ENEURO.0162-25.2025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recent fMRI studies reported transformed representations between perception and visual working memory (VWM) in human early visual cortex (EVC). This is inconsistent with the still widely cited original proposal of the sensory account of VWM, which argues for a shared perception-VWM representation based on successful cross-decoding of the two representations. Although cross-decoding was usually lower than within-VWM decoding and consistent with transformed VWM representations, this has been attributed to experimental differences between perceptual and VWM tasks: once they are equated, the same representation is expected to exist in both. Including human participants of both sexes, this study compared target and distractor representations during the same VWM delay period for the same objects, thereby equating experimental differences. Even with strong VWM representations present throughout occipitotemporal cortex (OTC, including EVC) and posterior parietal cortex (PPC), fMRI cross-decoding revealed significant representational differences between distractors (perception) and targets (VWM) in both regions. Similar differences existed between target encoding (perception) and delay (VWM), being greater in OTC than PPC, indicating more invariant target representations in PPC than OTC. As only part of the sensory input is usually task-relevant, sustaining sensory input in VWM without selection/refinement/consolidation is both taxing and unnecessary. Transformed representations, mediated by task goals and associative areas coding task-relevant information (e.g., PPC), can easily account for these and other recent findings. A task-driven transformed account of VWM thus better captures the nature of VWM representation in the human brain (including EVC) than the sensory representations originally proposed by the sensory account of VWM.<b>Significance Statement</b> The original proposal of the sensory account of visual working memory (VWM) argues for a shared representation between perception and VWM in sensory areas. This assumption, however, was not thoroughly tested due to differences in experimental settings in prior studies. Using fMRI cross-decoding and closely matched experimental conditions, this study compared object representations when they were VWM targets and distractors and during the encoding and delay period of VWM. Both comparisons revealed significant representational differences between perception and VWM in human sensory areas. These results are inconsistent with the sensory nature of VWM representations as it is originally proposed. Instead, they support a task-driven transformed account of VWM in which sensory input is selected/refined/consolidated before VWM storage in these areas.</p>","PeriodicalId":11617,"journal":{"name":"eNeuro","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eNeuro","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0162-25.2025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent fMRI studies reported transformed representations between perception and visual working memory (VWM) in human early visual cortex (EVC). This is inconsistent with the still widely cited original proposal of the sensory account of VWM, which argues for a shared perception-VWM representation based on successful cross-decoding of the two representations. Although cross-decoding was usually lower than within-VWM decoding and consistent with transformed VWM representations, this has been attributed to experimental differences between perceptual and VWM tasks: once they are equated, the same representation is expected to exist in both. Including human participants of both sexes, this study compared target and distractor representations during the same VWM delay period for the same objects, thereby equating experimental differences. Even with strong VWM representations present throughout occipitotemporal cortex (OTC, including EVC) and posterior parietal cortex (PPC), fMRI cross-decoding revealed significant representational differences between distractors (perception) and targets (VWM) in both regions. Similar differences existed between target encoding (perception) and delay (VWM), being greater in OTC than PPC, indicating more invariant target representations in PPC than OTC. As only part of the sensory input is usually task-relevant, sustaining sensory input in VWM without selection/refinement/consolidation is both taxing and unnecessary. Transformed representations, mediated by task goals and associative areas coding task-relevant information (e.g., PPC), can easily account for these and other recent findings. A task-driven transformed account of VWM thus better captures the nature of VWM representation in the human brain (including EVC) than the sensory representations originally proposed by the sensory account of VWM.Significance Statement The original proposal of the sensory account of visual working memory (VWM) argues for a shared representation between perception and VWM in sensory areas. This assumption, however, was not thoroughly tested due to differences in experimental settings in prior studies. Using fMRI cross-decoding and closely matched experimental conditions, this study compared object representations when they were VWM targets and distractors and during the encoding and delay period of VWM. Both comparisons revealed significant representational differences between perception and VWM in human sensory areas. These results are inconsistent with the sensory nature of VWM representations as it is originally proposed. Instead, they support a task-driven transformed account of VWM in which sensory input is selected/refined/consolidated before VWM storage in these areas.

人类枕颞叶和后顶叶皮层视觉工作记忆表征的转化。
最近的fMRI研究报道了人类早期视觉皮层(EVC)知觉和视觉工作记忆(VWM)之间的转换表征。这与仍然被广泛引用的VWM感官解释的原始提议不一致,该提议主张基于成功交叉解码两种表征的共享感知-VWM表征。虽然交叉解码通常低于VWM内解码,并且与转换后的VWM表示一致,但这归因于感知和VWM任务之间的实验差异:一旦它们相等,预计两者中存在相同的表示。本研究包括男女参与者,比较了在相同的VWM延迟期间对相同物体的目标和分心物表征,从而相等的实验差异。即使在枕颞皮质(OTC,包括EVC)和后顶叶皮质(PPC)中存在强烈的VWM表征,fMRI交叉解码显示两个区域中分心物(感知)和目标(VWM)之间存在显著的表征差异。目标编码(感知)和延迟(VWM)之间也存在类似的差异,OTC比PPC更大,表明PPC比OTC更具不变的目标表征。由于通常只有部分感觉输入是与任务相关的,在没有选择/精炼/巩固的情况下维持VWM的感觉输入既费力又不必要。由任务目标和编码任务相关信息的关联区域(例如,PPC)介导的转换表征可以很容易地解释这些和其他最近的发现。因此,与最初提出的VWM感官表征相比,任务驱动的VWM转换描述更好地捕捉了人脑(包括EVC)中VWM表征的本质。最初提出的视觉工作记忆(VWM)的感官解释认为知觉和VWM在感觉区域有共同的表征。然而,由于先前研究中实验设置的差异,这一假设并未得到彻底的验证。本研究采用fMRI交叉解码和紧密匹配的实验条件,比较了物体在作为VWM目标和干扰物以及在VWM编码和延迟期间的表征。两种比较都揭示了知觉和VWM在人类感觉区域的显著代表性差异。这些结果与最初提出的VWM表征的感官性质不一致。相反,他们支持一种任务驱动的VWM转换解释,其中感觉输入在这些区域的VWM存储之前被选择/精炼/巩固。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
eNeuro
eNeuro Neuroscience-General Neuroscience
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
486
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: An open-access journal from the Society for Neuroscience, eNeuro publishes high-quality, broad-based, peer-reviewed research focused solely on the field of neuroscience. eNeuro embodies an emerging scientific vision that offers a new experience for authors and readers, all in support of the Society’s mission to advance understanding of the brain and nervous system.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信