To Be or Not to Be Relevant: Comparing Short- and Long-Term Consequences Across Working Memory Prioritization Procedures

Priority-based allocation of attentional resources has shown robust effects in working memory (WM) with both cue-based and reward-based prioritization. However, direct comparisons between these effects in WM are needed. In addition, the consequences of WM prioritization for remembering in the long-term remain unclear for both prioritization procedures. Our goal was to test and compare the immediate and long-term memory (LTM) effects of cue-based versus reward-based retrospective prioritization of WM content. Across two experiments, participants were presented with four items and were then indicated to prioritize one of the items, through the presentation of either a retro-cue or a reward pattern. We tested immediate and delayed memory of prioritized and unprioritized items in both prioritization procedures. The results of the first experiment show a prioritization benefit in WM and LTM, but the effect in WM seemed to be driven solely by the retro-cue manipulation, making it hard to interpret any long-term reward-based effects. In a second experiment, using a more explicit and meaningful reward-based prioritization, the results showed a prioritization benefit in WM for both prioritization manipulations. However, the prioritization benefit in LTM appeared to be driven predominantly by the retro-cue manipulation. Overall, we found (1) that the particular way in which attention is directed in WM impacts the size of the prioritization benefit in WM, (2) that WM prioritization generally results in beneficial effects for the prioritized information in the long-term, and (3) that long-term effects of WM prioritization are more consistently found when using cue-based prioritization in WM.