JN Ad Instruments
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 102: 1779-1789, 2009. First published July 8, 2009; doi:10.1152/jn.00179.2009
0022-3077/09 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
102/3/1779    most recent
00179.2009v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berry, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Gazzaley, A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Berry, A. S.
Right arrow Articles by Gazzaley, A.

Practice-Related Improvement in Working Memory is Modulated by Changes in Processing External Interference

Anne S. Berry1, Theodore P. Zanto1, Aaron M. Rutman1, Wesley C. Clapp1 and Adam Gazzaley1

1Departments of Neurology and Physiology, W. M. Keck Foundation Center for Integrative Neuroscience, University of California, San Francisco, California

Submitted 2 March 2009; accepted in final form 2 July 2009

Abstract

Working memory (WM) performance is impaired by the presence of external interference. Accordingly, more efficient processing of intervening stimuli with practice may lead to enhanced WM performance. To explore the role of practice on the impact that interference has on WM performance, we studied young adults with electroencephalographic (EEG) recordings as they performed three motion-direction, delayed-recognition tasks. One task was presented without interference, whereas two tasks introduced different types of interference during the interval of memory maintenance: distractors and interruptors. Distractors were to be ignored, whereas interruptors demanded attention based on task instructions for a perceptual discrimination. We show that WM performance was disrupted by both types of interference, but interference-induced disruption abated across a single experimental session through rapid learning. WM accuracy and response time improved in a manner that was correlated with changes in early neural measures of interference processing in visual cortex (i.e., P1 suppression and N1 enhancement). These results suggest practice-related changes in processing interference exert a positive influence on WM performance, highlighting the importance of filtering irrelevant information and the dynamic interactions that exist between neural processes of perception, attention, and WM during learning.


Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: A. Gazzaley, University of California, San Francisco, 600 16th St., Genentech Hall, MC2240 Rm. N472J, San Francisco, CA 94158 (Email: adam.gazzaley{at}ucsf.edu)







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2009 by the The American Physiological Society.