
stored patterns corresponding to frontally viewed faces will be activated,
only some more than others depending on the degree of match. Ongoing
cognitive activities will also have an infl uence. For example, looking for a
particular person will prime those patterns that have links to other infor-
mation already in verbal working memory about that person. ose pat-
terns that have been primed will be more readily activated than those that
have not.
Many patterns become activated to some extent in the IT cortex, but we
actually perceive only very few. A second wave of activation, this time from
the top-down, determines which of the many patterns actually makes it
into working memory. At this point, a kind of neural choice occurs and so
we perceive not all faces but the face of a particular person. e selection
process is based on the pattern that is responded to most strongly. is is
called a biased competition model .
e biasing has to do with priming and
the task relevance of the visual information. Many patterns compete, but
only between one and three win. Winning means that all competing pat-
tern matches to other faces are suppressed. e result of winning is that a
top-down wave of activation both enhances those lower-level patterns and
suppresses all other pattern components.
e overall result is a nexus binding together the particular V4 patterns
that make up the winning objects. Only one to three visual objects make
the cut and are held in visual working memory.
ose visual objects that win will generally be linked to other infor-
mation that is nonvisual. Relevant concepts may become active in verbal
working memory; action sequences controlling the eyes or the hands may
be activated or brought to a state of readiness.
How fast can we extract objects from a visual image? In an experiment
carried out in 1969 at MIT psychologist, Mary Potter, and her research
assistant, Ellen Levy, presented images to people at various rates.
ey
were asked to press a button if they saw some specifi c object in a picture,
for example, a dog. ey found that they could fl ash a sequences of pic-
tures, sometimes with one containing a dog, at rates of up to ten per sec-
ond and still people would guess its presence correctly most of the time.
But this does not mean that they could remember much from the pictures.
On the contrary, they could remember almost nothing, just that there was
a dog present. It does, however, establish an upper rate for the identifi ca-
tion of individual objects. As a general rule of thumb, between one and
three objects are rapidly identifi ed each time the eye alights and rests
at each fi xation point usually for about one-fi fth of a second. Even when
we study individual objects closely, this typically this involves a series of
Many theorists have developed
variations on the biased competition
idea. See, for example, Earl Miller,
2000. The prefrontal cortex and
cognitive control. Nature Reviews:
Neuroscience. 1: 59–65.
Mary C. Potter and Ellen Levy E.I.
1969. Recognition memory for a
rapid sequence of pictures. Journal of
Experimental Psychology. 81:
10–15. The technique of rapidly
presenting image sequences is called
RSVP for Rapid Serial Visual .
Visual and Verbal Working Memory 119
CH06-P370896.indd 119CH06-P370896.indd 119 1/23/2008 6:57:07 PM1/23/2008 6:57:07 PM