ArticleJournal of cognitive neuroscience2024
Representing Context and Priority in Working Memory.
Article in Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Evidence for Abstract Codes in Parietal Cortex Guiding Prospective Working Memory.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Article
- The precision principle: driving biological self-organization.Frontiers in network physiology · 2025Article
- The human posterior parietal cortices orthogonalize the representation of different streams of information concurrently coded in visual working memory.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- Single-pulse Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Affects Working-memory Performance via Posterior Beta-band Oscillations.Journal of cognitive neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to prioritize among contents in working memory (WM) is critical for successful control of thought and behavior. Recent work has demonstrated that prioritization in WM can be implemented by representing different states of priority in different representational formats. Here, we explored the mechanisms underlying WM prioritization by simulating the double serial retrocuing task with recurrent neural networks. Visualization of stimulus representational dynamics using principal component analysis revealed that the network represented trial context (order of presentation) and priority via different mechanisms. Ordinal context, a stable property lasting the duration of the trial, was accomplished by segregating representations into orthogonal subspaces. Priority, which changed multiple times during a trial, was accomplished by separating representations into different strata within each subspace. We assessed the generality of these mechanisms by applying dimensionality reduction and multiclass decoding to fMRI and EEG data sets and found that priority and context are represented differently along the dorsal visual stream and that behavioral performance is sensitive to trial-by-trial variability of priority coding, but not context coding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.