Cited by 77Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Abilities and TestingMemory Processes and Influences

Automatic Prioritization of Self-Referential Stimuli in Working Memory

Open access
Yin, Shouhang, Sui, Jie, Chiu, Yu-Chin, Chen, Antao, Egner, Tobias·2019·Psychological Science

Abstract

People preferentially attend to external stimuli that are related to themselves compared with others. Whether a similar self-reference bias applies to internal representations, such as those maintained in working memory (WM), is presently unknown. We tested this possibility in four experiments, in which participants were first trained to associate social labels (self, friend, stranger) with arbitrary colors and then performed a delayed match-to-sample spatial WM task on color locations. Participants consistently responded fastest to WM probes at locations of self-associated colors (Experiments 1-4). This self-bias was driven not by differential exogenous attention during encoding or retrieval (Experiments 1 and 2) but by internal attentional prioritization of self-related representations during WM maintenance (Experiment 3). Moreover, self-prioritization in WM was nonstrategic, as this bias persisted even under conditions in which it hurt WM performance. These findings document an automatic prioritization of self-referential items in WM, which may form the basis of some egocentric biases in decision making.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0956797618818483

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Yin, S., Sui, J., Chiu, Y.-C., Chen, A., & Egner, T.
Affiliations
  • Southwest University (CN)
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • Duke University (US)
Corresponding author
Chen, Antao
Venue
Psychological Science
Published
2019-01-17
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
415-423
ISSN
  • 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9280
OpenAlex
W2904073334
Cited by
77
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3
FWCI
4.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure (University of Bath) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31771254, 61431013)
  • Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (SWU1609106, SWU1709107)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
working memory, attentional prioritization, internal representations, social labels, delayed matching-to-sample, egocentric bias
MeSH terms
Attentional Bias, Adolescent, Attention, Body Image, China, Color Perception, Ego, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Students, Bias, Young Adult, Spatial Memory

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