Are multiple visual short-term memory storages necessary to explain the retro-cue effect?

Abstract

Recent research has shown that change detection performance is enhanced when, during the retention interval, attention is cued to the location of the upcoming test item. This retro-cue advantage has led some researchers to suggest that visual short-term memory (VSTM) is divided into a durable, limited-capacity storage and a more fragile, high-capacity storage. Consequently, performance is poor on the no-cue trials because fragile VSTM is overwritten by the test display and only durable VSTM is accessible under these conditions. In contrast, performance is improved in the retro-cue condition because attention keeps fragile VSTM accessible. The aim of the present study was to test the assumptions underlying this two-storage account. Participants were asked to encode an array of colors for a change detection task involving no-cue and retro-cue trials. A retro-cue advantage was found even when the cue was presented after a visual (Experiment 1) or a central (Experiment 2) interference. Furthermore, the magnitude of the interference was comparable between the no-cue and retro-cue trials. These data undermine the main empirical support for the two-storage account and suggest that the presence of a retro-cue benefit cannot be used to differentiate between different VSTM storages. © 2012 Psychonomic Society, Inc.