The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Spatial versus Object Working Memory: PET Investigations
Abstract
We used positron emission tomography (PET) to answer the following question: Is working memory a unitary storage system, or does it instead include different storage buffers for different kinds of information? In Experiment 1, PET measures were taken while subjects engaged in either a spatial-memory task (retain the position of three dots for 3 sec) or an object-memory task (retain the identity of two objects for 3 sec). The results manifested a striking double dissociation, as the spatial task activated only right-hemisphere regions, whereas the object task activated primarily left-hemisphere regions. The spatial (right-hemisphere) regions included occipital, parietal, and prefrontal areas, while the object (left-hemisphere) regions included inferotemporal and parietal areas. Experiment 2 was similar to Experiment 1 except that the stimuli and trial events were identical for the spatial and object tasks; whether spatial or object memory was required was manipulated by instructions. The PET results once more showed a double dissociation, as the spatial task activated primarily right-hemisphere regions (again including occipital, parietal and prefrontal areas), whereas the object task activated only left-hemisphere regions (again including inferotemporal and parietal areas). Experiment 3 was a strictly behavioral study, which produced another double dissociation. It used the same tasks as Experiment 2, and showed that a variation in spatial similarity affected performance in the spatial but not the object task, whereas a variation in shape similarity affected performance in the object but not the spatial task. Taken together, the results of the three experiments clearly imply that different working-memory buffers are used for storing spatial and object information.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A capacity theory of comprehension: individual differences in working memory
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1992) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.99.1.122 · Cited by 4,153
The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method
Sternberg, S. (1969) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/0001-6918(69)90055-9 · Cited by 3,137
Mnemonic coding of visual space in the monkey's dorsolateral prefrontal cortex
Funahashi, S., Bruce, C. J., & Goldman-Rakic, P. S. (1989) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.1989.61.2.331 · Cited by 2,685
Pardo, J. V., Pardo, P. J., Janer, K. W., & Raichle, M. E. (1990) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.87.1.256 · Cited by 1,495
Dissociating Verbal and Spatial Working Memory Using PET
Smith, E. E., Jonides, J., & Koeppe, R. A. (1996) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/6.1.11 · Cited by 962
Self-citation
Cited by
Working memory: Looking back and looking forward
Baddeley, A. (2003) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1201 · Cited by 5,200
Imaging Cognition II: An Empirical Review of 275 PET and fMRI Studies
Cabeza, R., & Nyberg, L. (2000) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/08989290051137585 · Cited by 3,598
Emotion, Decision Making and the Orbitofrontal Cortex
Bechara, A. (2000) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/10.3.295 · Cited by 3,589
Common regions of the human frontal lobe recruited by diverse cognitive demands
Duncan, J., & Owen, A. M. (2000) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/s0166-2236(00)01633-7 · Cited by 2,498
Kane, M. J., & Engle, R. W. (2002) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196323 · Cited by 2,229
Metadata
- Authors
- Smith, E. E., Jonides, J., Koeppe, R. A., Awh, E., Schumacher, E. H., & Minoshima, S.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 1995
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 337-356
- ISSN
- 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
- 1530-8898
- OpenAlex
- W2072763599
- Cited by
- 510
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 50.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Spatial versus Object Working Memory: PET Investigations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.3.337
- The paper
- Smith, E. E., Jonides, J., Koeppe, R. A., Awh, E., Schumacher, E. H., & Minoshima, S. (1995). Spatial versus Object Working Memory: PET Investigations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1995.7.3.337
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.