DOI: 10.5061/dryad.mgqnk99br
title: Processing in working memory boosts long-term memory representations and their retrieval

description: Prior research has explored how working memory influences the formation of
 new long-term memories, but its role in modifying existing representations
 remains unclear. This study examines whether attentional prioritization
 and testing in working memory enhance long-term memory retrieval and
 investigates the underlying neural mechanisms. Eighty-six participants
 completed a three-phase memory task combining a long-term memory- with a
 working memory retro-cue paradigm. First, participants learned
 object-location associations. Next, during a working memory task, some
 objects have undergone attentional prioritization and testing, others have
 only been tested in working memory. Finally, participants retrieved the
 object locations from long-term memory. Three key findings emerged: (1)
 both attentional prioritization and testing in working memory improved
 long-term memory retrieval; (2) serving as a probe in working memory
 further contributed to long-term memory enhancement, with benefits
 observed at behavioral and neural levels; and (3) cross-phase decoding
 revealed a comparable representational format for location information
 across task phases, possibly explained by the neural reinstatement of
 location information across phases. These results suggest that working
 memory dynamically shapes long-term memory representations, playing a more
 active and integrated role in long-term memory formation than previously
 thought.
description: # Processing in working memory boosts long-term memory representations and
 their retrieval Dataset DOI:
 [10.5061/dryad.mgqnk99br](10.5061/dryad.mgqnk99br) ## Description of the
 Data and File Structure This dataset accompanies the publication
 *Processing in working memory boosts long-term memory representations and
 their retrieval* (Sabo & Schneider, 2025). For detailed information on
 the **experimental paradigm**, **data collection procedures**, and **EEG
 setup**, please refer to the publication. In addition to EEG data, **raw
 behavioral data** are included and can be used independently for
 behavioral analyses. Behavioral datasets are provided in the following
 compressed files: * `behav_Exp1.zip` * `behav_Exp2.tar` For each
 participant, **four associated files** are provided: 1. `XX_learning.xlsx`
 – learning phase data 2. `XX_WM.xlsx` – working memory phase data 3.
 `XX_retrieval.xlsx` – retrieval phase data 4. `XX_diary.xlsx` – diary file
 with responses and response times across all phases **Note:** Event-coded
 EEG files already incorporate the behavioral data. #### Behavioral Data –
 Experiment 1 (`behav_Exp1.zip`) **Participants:** VP002 – VP45 **Files per
 participant:** * **`XX_learning.xlsx`** – Contains information about the
 stimuli presented during the learning phase of the experimental task. *
 **trial** – Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers within the learning
 phase range from 1–360. * **imgNumber** – Codes the number of the object
 image presented during the learning phase (1–240). * **prePos** – Codes
 the location of the object. There are four possible locations: 1 = top, 2
 = right, 3 = bottom, 4 = left. * **`XX_WM.xlsx`** – Contains information
 about the stimuli presented during the working memory phase of the
 experimental task. * **trial** – Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers
 within the working memory phase range from 1–240. * **imgNumber_target** –
 Codes the number of the target object presented during the task. Target
 objects were the tested items in the working memory task (1–240). *
 **pos_target** – Codes the location of the target object (1–4). *
 **imgNumber_distractor** – Codes the number of the distractor object
 presented in the memory array. Distractor objects were not tested in the
 working memory task (1–240). * **pos_distractor** – Codes the location of
 the distractor object (1–4). * **imgNumber_new1** – Codes the identity of
 one of the filler objects in the memory array. Filler objects were
 scrambled versions of real images, each assigned a number code. *
 **pos_new1** – Codes the location of `imgNumber_new1` (1–4). *
 **imgNumber_new2** – Codes the identity of the second filler object in the
 memory array (also a scrambled image with a number code). * **pos_new2** –
 Codes the location of `imgNumber_new2` (1–4). * **imgNumber_probe**
 - Codes the number of the test object presented at the end of the working
 memory trial. * **pos_probe** – Codes the position of the test object.
 Since the test object was always presented centrally, this value is always
 0. * **`XX_retr.xlsx`** – Contains information about the stimuli presented
 during the retrieval phase of the experimental task. * **trial** –
 Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers within the retrieval phase range
 from 1–360. * **imgNumber** – Codes the number of the object image
 presented during the retrieval phase (1–240). * **presPos** – Codes the
 presented position. Since all objects were centrally presented in this
 phase, the values are always 0. * **pos_corr_answer** – Codes the correct
 location that participants were required to report in this phase. *
 **`XX_diary.xlsx`** – Contains behavioral data recorded throughout the
 entire experiment. * **trial** – Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers
 1–360 correspond to the learning phase, 361–600 to the working memory
 phase, and 601–960 to the retrieval phase. * **corr_pos** – Indicates the
 correct location participants were required to report during each phase.
 In the learning phase, this was always 2, because participants had to
 click the right button to confirm the end of a trial. In the working
 memory phase, the correct response was either 1 or 3, coding “match” or
 “no match” respectively (the mapping was counterbalanced across
 participants). In the retrieval phase, responses could range from 1–4,
 allowing participants to report any of the four locations. * **RT** –
 Response times associated with each button press. * **accuracy** –
 Indicates whether the participant’s response was correct or incorrect
 (labelled as `false`). Accuracy values are missing during the learning
 phase, replaced with `"---"` because the button press was only
 used to proceed to the next trial.File: behav_Exp2.tar
 **Description:** Excel files containing the behavioural data of every
 participant from Experiment 2. #### Behavioral Data – Experiment 2
 (`behav_Exp2.tar`) **Participants:** VP01 – VP45 **Files per
 participant:** * **`XX_learning.xlsx`** – Contains information about the
 stimuli presented during the learning phase of the experimental task. *
 **trial** – Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers within the learning
 phase range from 1–600. * **imgNumber** – Codes the number of the object
 image presented during the learning phase (1–300). * **prePos** – Codes
 the location of the object. There are four possible locations: 1 = top, 2
 = right, 3 = bottom, 4 = left. * **`XX_WM.xlsx`** – Contains information
 about the stimuli presented during the working memory phase of the
 experimental task. * **trial** – Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers
 within the working memory phase range from 1–480. * **imgNumber_target** –
 Codes the number of the target object presented during the task. Target
 objects were the tested items in the working memory task (1–300). *
 **pos_target** – Codes the location of the target object (1–4). *
 **imgNumber_distractor** – Codes the number of the distractor object
 presented in the memory array. Distractor objects were not tested in the
 working memory task (1–300). * **pos_distractor** – Codes the location of
 the distractor object (1–4). * **imgNumber_new1** – Codes the identity of
 one of the filler objects in the memory array. Filler objects were
 scrambled versions of real images, each assigned a number code. *
 **pos_new1** – Codes the location of `imgNumber_new1` (1–4). *
 **imgNumber_new2** – Codes the identity of the second filler object in the
 memory array (also a scrambled image with a number code). * **pos_new2** –
 Codes the location of `imgNumber_new2` (1–4). * **imgNumber_probe**
 - Codes the number of the test object presented at the end of the working
 memory trial. * **pos_probe** – Codes the position of the test object.
 Since the test object was always presented centrally, this value is always
 0. * **condition** – Codes the type of retro-cue presented in the working
 memory task. Half of the cues were selective retro-cues and the other half
 were neutral retro-cues. * **`XX_retr.xlsx`** – Contains information about
 the stimuli presented during the retrieval phase of the experimental task.
 * **trial** – Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers within the
 retrieval phase range from 1–600. * **imgNumber** – Codes the number of
 the object image presented during the retrieval phase (1–300). *
 **presPos** – Codes the presented position. Since all objects were
 centrally presented in this phase, the values are always 0. *
 **pos_corr_answer** – Codes the correct location that participants were
 required to report in this phase. * **`XX_diary.xlsx`** – Contains
 behavioral data recorded throughout the entire experiment. * **trial** –
 Indicates the trial number. Trial numbers 1–600 correspond to the learning
 phase, 601–1080 to the working memory phase, and 1081–1681 to the
 retrieval phase. * **corr_pos** – Indicates the correct location
 participants were required to report during each phase. In the learning
 phase, this was always 2, because participants had to click the right
 button to confirm the end of a trial. In the working memory phase, the
 correct response was either 1 or 3, coding “match” or “no match”
 respectively (the mapping was counterbalanced across participants). In the
 retrieval phase, responses could range from 1–4, allowing participants to
 report any of the four locations. * **RT** – Response times associated
 with each button press. * **Accuracy** – Indicates whether the
 participant’s response was correct or incorrect (labelled as `false`).
 Accuracy values are missing during the learning phase, replaced with
 `"---"` because the button press was only used to proceed to the
 next trial. #### EEG Data – Experiment 1 (`EEG_coded_Exp1.zip`)
 **Format:** The compressed folder contains 86 files, half of which
 are `.set` files and the other half are `.fdt` files. This file type is
 EEGLAB specific (MATLAB structure). Participants are labelled VP002 –
 VP45, every participant has a corresponding `.set` and `.fdt` file.
 Because the EEG datasets are large, EEGLAB stores the raw/processed data
 in a separate binary file with the `.fdt` extension. The `.set` file
 contains a pointer to the `.fdt` file, so both must be present in the same
 directory to load the dataset correctly. Files are event-coded and ready
 for preprocessing (see scripts at:
 [https://osf.io/ne9yt/](https://osf.io/ne9yt/)). **EEGLAB fields:** |
 Field | Description | | :------------------- |
 :--------------------------------------------------------------- | |
 EEG.filename | Name of `.set` file | | EEG.filepath | File path | |
 EEG.comments | original file name | | EEG.nbchan | Number of channels (64)
 | | EEG.trials | Number of trials (1 because the data are continuous) | |
 EEG.pnts | Number of data points | | EEG.srate | Sampling rate (1000 Hz) |
 | EEG.xmin | Start time (s) | | EEG.xmax | End time (s) | | EEG.data &
 EEG.times | EEG signal data & the corresponding timepoints | |
 EEG.chanlocs | Channel metadata | | EEG.event | Event markers | |
 EEG.urevent | Original event list | | EEG.reject | Artifact rejection info
 | | EEG.history | Processing history | | EEG.etc | Misc. info | |
 EEG.trialinfo | variables from the four excel files were moved to a single
 table | Triggers in the EEG data have the following meaning: * 254 = start
 of experiment * 255 = end of experiment * 100-123 = start of a block *
 200-223 = end of a block * 1 =  object onset in the learning phase * 2 =
 memory array onset in the working memory phase * 3 = retro-cue onset in
 the working memory phase * 4 = test object onset in the working memory
 phase * 5 = object onset in the retrieval phase * 241 = response  ## EEG
 Data – Experiment 2 (`EEG_coded_Exp2.tar`) Identical parameters and
 structure as Experiment 1 EEG dataset. ## Code/software The scripts used
 in the current project can be accessed on
 OSF: [https://osf.io/ne9yt/](https://osf.io/ne9yt/) The scripts were
 written in MATLAB R2023b, and they use the EEGLAB toolbox. Please refer to
 the publication for the specific packages needed to run the scripts.  ###
 Description of the data contained in `DisciplineSpecificMetadata.json` The
 metadata file describes a human cognitive neuroscience dataset consisting
 of neural data acquired using electroencephalography (EEG). The data are
 in raw form, with no preprocessing applied. The experiment belonging to
 this dataset, focuses on long-term memory and is based on a combined
 episodic long-term memory and working memory task. In Experiment 1,
 participants first learned object–location associations for later recall.
 In the second phase, a retro-cue working memory paradigm was employed in
 which objects from the learning phase were presented alongside scrambled
 distractors; after a short delay, a 100 % informative cue indicated which
 object would be tested, and participants judged whether the cued object
 matched a centrally presented probe. Each object appeared four times in
 the same location during this phase. In the final retrieval phase, all
 learned objects were presented again, and participants indicated the
 remembered location using a four-button spatially aligned response device.
 Experiment 2 was identical to Experiment 1, except that the working memory
 task included also a neutral (non-infomative) cue, which did not offer any
 information about the to-be-tested object. Analyses focused on data from
 this long-term memory retrieval phase. The dataset includes data from 43
 participants per experiment, and the full analysis pipeline is available
 at [https://osf.io/ne9yt/](https://osf.io/ne9yt/). MATLAB was used for
 experimental control and JASP for Bayesian statistical analysis. ## Human
 subjects data All participants provided explicit informed consent for
 their data to be shared in de-identified form in a public repository. To
 ensure privacy and confidentiality, all data were de-identified prior to
 publication. Specifically, all personal identifiers (e.g., names, dates of
 birth, contact details) were removed. EEG data files were stripped of any
 embedded metadata that could link the data to individual participants.
 Participant codes were randomly assigned and do not contain any
 information that could enable re-identification. No video, audio, or other
 biometric data were included. These steps ensure that the data cannot
 reasonably be used to identify individual participants.