ArticleeLife2025
Neural dynamics of visual working memory representation during sensory distraction.
Article in eLife, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic Neural Deactivation Bridges Direct and Competitive Inhibition Processes.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Article
- Neural Dynamics of Reselecting Visual and Motor Contents in Working Memory after External Interference.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Manipulating attentional priority creates a trade-off between memory and sensory representations in human visual cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Sensory modality- and load-dependent changes across cortical working memory representations.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
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
Recent studies have provided evidence for the concurrent encoding of sensory percepts and visual working memory (VWM) contents across visual areas; however, it has remained unclear how these two types of representations are concurrently present. Here, we reanalyzed an open-access fMRI dataset where participants memorized a sensory stimulus while simultaneously being presented with sensory distractors. First, we found that the VWM code in several visual regions did not fully generalize between different time points, suggesting a dynamic code. A more detailed analysis revealed that this was due to shifts in coding spaces across time. Second, we collapsed neural signals across time to assess the degree of interference between VWM contents and sensory distractors, specifically by testing the alignment of their encoding spaces. We find that VWM and feature-matching sensory distractors are encoded in coding spaces that do not fully overlap, but the separation decreases when distractors negatively impact behavioral performance in recalling the target. Together, these results indicate a role of dynamic coding and temporally stable coding spaces in helping multiplex perception and VWM within visual areas.
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.