日本語
 
Help Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細


公開

学術論文

The causal involvement of the visual cortex in visual working memory remains uncertain

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons214517

Grassi,  PR       
Institutional Guests, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons83794

Bannert,  MM       
Institutional Guests, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons83797

Bartels,  A       
Institutional Guests, Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Max Planck Society;

Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
フルテキスト (公開)
公開されているフルテキストはありません
付随資料 (公開)
There is no public supplementary material available
引用

Grassi, P., Bannert, M., & Bartels, A. (2024). The causal involvement of the visual cortex in visual working memory remains uncertain. Royal Society Open Science, 11(6). doi:10.1098/rsos.231884.


引用: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-000F-6C9E-7
要旨
The role of the early visual cortex in visual working memory (VWM) is a matter of current debate. Neuroimaging studies have consistently shown that visual areas encode the content of working memory, while transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have presented incongruent results. Thus, we lack conclusive evidence supporting the causal role of early visual areas in VWM. In a recent registered report, Phylactou et al. (Phylactou P, Shimi A, Konstantinou N 2023 R. Soc. Open Sci. 10, 230321 (doi:10.1098/rsos.230321)) sought to tackle this controversy via two well-powered TMS experiments, designed to correct possible methodological issues of previous attempts identified in a preceding systematic review and meta-analysis (Phylactou P, Traikapi A, Papadatou-Pastou M, Konstantinou N 2022 Psychon. Bull. Rev. 29, 1594–1624 (doi:10.3758/s13423-022-02107-y)). However, a key part of their critique and experimental design was based on a misunderstanding of the visual system. They disregarded two important anatomical facts, namely that early visual areas of each hemisphere represent the contralateral visual hemifield, and that each hemisphere receives equally strong input from each eye—both leading to confounded conditions and artefactual effects in their studies. Here, we explain the correct anatomy, describe why their experiments failed to address current issues in the literature and perform a thorough reanalysis of their TMS data revealing important null results. We conclude that the causal role of the visual cortex in VWM remains uncertain.