MACC lab presents

Here, you can find the latest posters by MACC lab.

Vision Sciences Society Meeting 2023

Şentürk, Ünver, Günseli. Reactivation of rules and items.png

The reactivation of task rules triggers the reactivation of task-relevant items

Yağmur Şentürk. Nursima Ünver, Can Demircan, Tobias Egner, & Eren Günseli

We explored the effects of repetitions and switches of task rules and task-relevant items on the storage of items in WM. A repeated target’s representation shifted from LTM to WM. However, a repeated target was reactivated in WM when switching to a new task rule. This increase in WM involvement was not present for novel targets that already were represented in WM. Our results suggest that the reactivation LTMs back in WM is interdependent for representations of task rules and task-relevant items.

International Symposium on Brain and Cognitive Science 2023

Can individuals implement strategies to protect memories during retrieval against divided attention?

Ece Karagül, Eren Güngör, Nursima Ünver, & Eren Günseli

Divided attention during long-term memory retrieval is disruptive. We tested the effects of instructions to postpone retrieval upon an anticipated interference on the costs of interference on long-term memory retrieval. Moreover, we used a mixture model to estimate the probability of recall and precision. We found that divided attention disrupts mainly the accessibility not the precision of memories. Second, we did not obtain strong evidence that instructions to delay retrieval until after interference being beneficial. Our results suggest that retrieval might be initiated automatically upon the detection of a retrieval cue and once interrupted, memory traces remain distorded later.

Contextual stability, not prediction errors, underlies event segmentation
Berna Güler, Fatih Serin, & Eren Günseli

Perception is continuous but memories are segmented. The temporal structing of discrete events in episodic memory is called event segmentation. There are two opposing views regarding the underlying mechanism of event segmentation. Contrasting these theories have been challenging because of their interconnected nature. Here, we developed an experimental design to overcome this challenge. Check the poster out!

Disentangling Memory Precision and Internal Attention Through Repeated Memory Storage Reveals That Memory-Guided Attention Relies on Internal Attention
Fatih Serin & Eren Günseli

We guide attention based on memories. Attentional templates stored in the focus of attention within working memory have been claimed to direct attention in the external world. However, recently, precision of memories has been suggested to be the main driving factor behind memory-guided attention. Disentangling these theories is challenging given that precision is highest for internally attended memories. We believe we found a way to overcome this difficulty here.

Indirect Reward Does Not Capture Attention
Pelin Akbaş, Tamar, Mariam Aly, & Eren Günseli

Reward has been suggested to generalize across indirectly associated information. Does such indirect reward guide attention?

Indirect reward and attention screenshot.png

Individual differences in working memory reactivation of long-term memories predict protection against anticipated interference
Nursena Ataseven, Lara Todorova, Duygu Yücel, Berna Güler, Keisuke Fukuda, & Eren Günseli

Perceptual interference is detrimental to memories. When anticipating interference, would individuals rely on long-term memory or working memory to protect their representations? Working memory can be beneficial because internally attending working memories protects against interference. On the other hand, not reactivating long-term memories could be beneficial, as they would not be competing to be represented in similar visual and parietal regions. We found that half of our participants relied on working memory and the other half on long-term memory. Interference costs were present only for those who prepared with long-term memory, suggesting that working memory might be a better way to protect memories against interference.

Internal attention is the only retroactive mechanism for controlling precision in working memory
M. Yaren, Kaynar, Pelin Akbaş, Fatih Serin, & Eren Günseli

While internal attention and working memory interact with each other, we have recently shown that they are independent. If so, is there a top-down mechanism to control working memory precision beyond internal attention? Check out our poster.

The role of working memory for mental operations on information in long-term memory
Duygu Yücel, Betül Türk, & Eren Günseli

Working memory (WM) is suggested as a workspace for mental operations. However, this claim is based on studies that provided novel information to participants. r. Using a novel behavioral index, we examined the involvement of working memory for the information stored in long-term memory (LTM) during recognition and mental integration tasks

MACC lab presents

Vision Sciences Society Meeting 2023

Yağmur Şentürk. Nursima Ünver, Can Demircan, Tobias Egner, & Eren Günseli

International Symposium on Brain and Cognitive Science 2023

Contextual stability, not prediction errors, underlies event segmentation Berna Güler, Fatih Serin, & Eren Günseli

Disentangling Memory Precision and Internal Attention Through Repeated Memory Storage Reveals That Memory-Guided Attention Relies on Internal Attention Fatih Serin & Eren Günseli

Indirect Reward Does Not Capture Attention Pelin Akbaş, Tamar, Mariam Aly, & Eren Günseli

Individual differences in working memory reactivation of long-term memories predict protection against anticipated interference Nursena Ataseven, Lara Todorova, Duygu Yücel, Berna Güler, Keisuke Fukuda, & Eren Günseli

Internal attention is the only retroactive mechanism for controlling precision in working memory M. Yaren, Kaynar, Pelin Akbaş, Fatih Serin, & Eren Günseli

The role of working memory for mental operations on information in long-term memory Duygu Yücel, Betül Türk, & Eren Günseli