Limits...
Training improves the capacity of visual working memory when it is adaptive, individualized, and targeted.

Shin E, Lee H, Yoo SA, Chong SC - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: The number of distractors and duration of the consolidation period were adjusted individually to increase the task difficulty of the filtering and consolidation training, respectively.Results showed that the degree of improvement shown during the training was positively correlated with the increase in memory capacity, and training-induced benefits were most evident for larger set sizes in the filtering training group.These results suggest that visual working memory training is effective, especially when it is adaptive, individualized, and targeted.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Cognitive Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.

ABSTRACT
The current study investigated whether training improves the capacity of visual working memory using individualized adaptive training methods. Two groups of participants were trained for two targeted processes, filtering and consolidation. Before and after the training, the participants, including those with no training, performed a lateralized change detection task in which one side of the visual display had to be selected and the other side ignored. Across ten-day training sessions, the participants performed two modified versions of the lateralized change detection task. The number of distractors and duration of the consolidation period were adjusted individually to increase the task difficulty of the filtering and consolidation training, respectively. Results showed that the degree of improvement shown during the training was positively correlated with the increase in memory capacity, and training-induced benefits were most evident for larger set sizes in the filtering training group. These results suggest that visual working memory training is effective, especially when it is adaptive, individualized, and targeted.

No MeSH data available.


Thresholds (expressed in pixels and in milliseconds, ms) shown in both the filtering and consolidation groups across the ten training sessions.The distractor areas show the threshold changes in the filtering training, and the ISIs show the threshold changes in the consolidation training. The error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4383536&req=5

pone.0121702.g003: Thresholds (expressed in pixels and in milliseconds, ms) shown in both the filtering and consolidation groups across the ten training sessions.The distractor areas show the threshold changes in the filtering training, and the ISIs show the threshold changes in the consolidation training. The error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.

Mentions: We then examined the changes in the filtering and consolidation groups over the 10 training sessions (Fig 3). In the filtering group, the maximal pixel size of the distractors (i.e., the threshold of distractor filtering) significantly increased, from 128 pixels (about 2.98 distractors) in the first session to 369 pixels (about 8.58 distractors) in the last session F(9, 162) = 27.297, p <. 001, ηp2 = .603. This increase suggests that the participants successfully filtered out more distractors after receiving the training, while their change detection performance remained similar. In the consolidation group, the minimal memory-mask interval (i.e., the threshold of consolidation interval) significantly decreased, from 332 ms in the first session to 209 ms in the last session, F(9, 162) = 2.085, p = .034, ηp2 = .104, suggesting that shorter consolidation intervals were needed to maintain similar levels of task performance after the training.


Training improves the capacity of visual working memory when it is adaptive, individualized, and targeted.

Shin E, Lee H, Yoo SA, Chong SC - PLoS ONE (2015)

Thresholds (expressed in pixels and in milliseconds, ms) shown in both the filtering and consolidation groups across the ten training sessions.The distractor areas show the threshold changes in the filtering training, and the ISIs show the threshold changes in the consolidation training. The error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4383536&req=5

pone.0121702.g003: Thresholds (expressed in pixels and in milliseconds, ms) shown in both the filtering and consolidation groups across the ten training sessions.The distractor areas show the threshold changes in the filtering training, and the ISIs show the threshold changes in the consolidation training. The error bars indicate the standard error of the mean.
Mentions: We then examined the changes in the filtering and consolidation groups over the 10 training sessions (Fig 3). In the filtering group, the maximal pixel size of the distractors (i.e., the threshold of distractor filtering) significantly increased, from 128 pixels (about 2.98 distractors) in the first session to 369 pixels (about 8.58 distractors) in the last session F(9, 162) = 27.297, p <. 001, ηp2 = .603. This increase suggests that the participants successfully filtered out more distractors after receiving the training, while their change detection performance remained similar. In the consolidation group, the minimal memory-mask interval (i.e., the threshold of consolidation interval) significantly decreased, from 332 ms in the first session to 209 ms in the last session, F(9, 162) = 2.085, p = .034, ηp2 = .104, suggesting that shorter consolidation intervals were needed to maintain similar levels of task performance after the training.

Bottom Line: The number of distractors and duration of the consolidation period were adjusted individually to increase the task difficulty of the filtering and consolidation training, respectively.Results showed that the degree of improvement shown during the training was positively correlated with the increase in memory capacity, and training-induced benefits were most evident for larger set sizes in the filtering training group.These results suggest that visual working memory training is effective, especially when it is adaptive, individualized, and targeted.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Center for Cognitive Science, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea.

ABSTRACT
The current study investigated whether training improves the capacity of visual working memory using individualized adaptive training methods. Two groups of participants were trained for two targeted processes, filtering and consolidation. Before and after the training, the participants, including those with no training, performed a lateralized change detection task in which one side of the visual display had to be selected and the other side ignored. Across ten-day training sessions, the participants performed two modified versions of the lateralized change detection task. The number of distractors and duration of the consolidation period were adjusted individually to increase the task difficulty of the filtering and consolidation training, respectively. Results showed that the degree of improvement shown during the training was positively correlated with the increase in memory capacity, and training-induced benefits were most evident for larger set sizes in the filtering training group. These results suggest that visual working memory training is effective, especially when it is adaptive, individualized, and targeted.

No MeSH data available.