September 2011
Volume 11, Issue 11
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2011
The tradeoff between memory capacity and precision is weaker in recall than in discrimination
Author Affiliations
  • Viljami Salmela
    Institute of Behavioural Sciences, University of Helsinki
  • Meri Lähde
    Institute of Behavioural Sciences, University of Helsinki
  • Jussi Saarinen
    Institute of Behavioural Sciences, University of Helsinki
Journal of Vision September 2011, Vol.11, 1244. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      This feature is available to authenticated users only.
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Viljami Salmela, Meri Lähde, Jussi Saarinen; The tradeoff between memory capacity and precision is weaker in recall than in discrimination. Journal of Vision 2011;11(11):1244.

      Download citation file:

      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

  • Supplements

The capacity of the visual working memory depends on the precision of the representations. Previously we have shown very limited working memory capacity for detecting changes in the shape (phase structure) of the radial frequency (RF) patterns. We tested whether the memory capacity is limited also when the shape is defined, not by the phase structure, but by the amplitude of RF patterns. Two different tasks were used for estimating the capacity: delayed discrimination and recall. The delayed discrimination thresholds were measured with 2-interval forced choice setup using Quest procedure. In the first interval, 1–6 stimulus items were presented with random amplitudes (.1–.5), RFs (3, 4 or 5), and phases (0–360 deg). In the second interval, after the 1.5 s blank period, the amplitude of one of the items was either increased or decreased. The observers' task was to say whether the changed item had higher amplitude in the first or in the second interval. In the recall experiment, the second interval consisted of a cue box and a probe item, and the observers' task was to adjust the amplitude of the probe to match the amplitude of the item in memory. Gaussian functions were fitted to the distribution of the adjustment errors. For one item, the amplitude thresholds were low (0.01–0.05) and the adjustments precise (standard deviations 0.01–0.03). As the number of items increased from 1 to 6, there was a linear, 6–14 -fold increase of the thresholds (0.14–0.29) but only 3-fold increase of the standard deviations (0.03–0.10). There were individual differences, but no sudden or complete breakdown in performance was observed for any subject. The results confirm the tradeoff between memory capacity and precision, and show that the amount of the tradeoff depends on the individual observers and the task by which the memory capacity is measured.


This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.