Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sex differences of cognitive load effects on object-location binding memory

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Biomedical Engineering Letters Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we investigated where the sex differences of object-location binding memory performance were influenced by the cognitive load. We used the fractal objects version of the ‘What was where?’ task to measure object memory, location memory and objection-location binding memory. Cognitive load was controlled by task difficulty presented two sessions: one session randomly displayed three or four fractal objects (Session 34) and the other session four or five objects (Session 45). The results showed that females outperformed males on object-location binding memory. Interestingly, even when the four object trials were compared between Session 34 and Session 45, in which we believed that the level of difficulty was similar while cognitive load varied, the swap error of males was significantly increased in Session 45 compared to females. In conclusion, there may be sex differences in object-location binding memory and the males could be more sensitive about the cognitive load than females.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Astur RS, Ortiz ML, Sutherland RJ. A characterization of performance by men and women in a virtual Morris water task: a large and reliable sex difference. Behav Brain Res. 1998;93(1):185–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Moffat SD, Hampson E, Hatzipantelis M. Navigation in a “virtual” maze: sex differences and correlation with psychometric measures of spatial ability in humans. Evol Hum Behav. 1998;19(2):73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Driscoll I, Hamilton DA, Yeo RA, Brooks WM, Sutherland RJ. Virtual navigation in humans: the impact of age, sex, and hormones on place learning. Horm Behav. 2005;47(3):326–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rahman Q, Koerting J. Sexual orientation-related differences in allocentric spatial memory tasks. Hippocampus. 2008;18(1):55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Voyer D, Postma A, Brake B, Imperato-McGinley J. Gender differences in object location memory: a meta-analysis. Psychon Bull Rev. 2007;14(1):23–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rahman Q, Wilson GD, Abrahams S. Sexual orientation related differences in spatial memory. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2003;9(03):376–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hassan B, Rahman Q. Selective sexual orientation-related differences in object location memory. Behav Neurosci. 2007;121(3):625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Silverman I, Choi J, Peters M. The hunter-gatherer theory of sex differences in spatial abilities: data from 40 countries. Arch Sex Behav. 2007;36(2):261–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Spiers MV, Sakamoto M, Elliott RJ, Baumann S. Sex differences in spatial object-location memory in a virtual grocery store. CyberPsychol Behav. 2008;11(4):471–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dabbs JM, Chang E-L, Strong RA, Milun R. Spatial ability, navigation strategy, and geographic knowledge among men and women. Evol Hum Behav. 1998;19(2):89–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Epting LK, Overman WH. Sex-sensitive tasks in men and women: a search for performance fluctuations across the menstrual cycle. Behav Neurosci. 1998;112(6):1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Janzen G, Van Turennout M. Selective neural representation of objects relevant for navigation. Nat Neurosci. 2004;7(6):673–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Postma A, Jager G, Kessels RP, Koppeschaar HP, van Honk J. Sex differences for selective forms of spatial memory. Brain Cogn. 2004;54(1):24–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jones CM, Healy SD. Differences in cue use and spatial memory in men and women. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2006;273(1598):2241–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kessels RP, Nys GM, Brands AM, van den Berg E, Van Zandvoort MJ. The modified Location Learning Test: norms for the assessment of spatial memory function in neuropsychological patients. Arch clin neuropsychol. 2006;21(8):841–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Postma A, Izendoorn R, De Haan EH. Sex differences in object location memory. Brain Cogn. 1998;36(3):334–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rahman Q, Bakare M, Serinsu C. No sex differences in spatial location memory for abstract designs. Brain Cogn. 2011;76(1):15–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pertzov Y, Dong MY, Peich M-C, Husain M. Forgetting what was where: The fragility of object-location binding. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e48214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pertzov Y, Miller TD, Gorgoraptis N, Caine D, Schott JM, Butler C, et al. Binding deficits in memory following medial temporal lobe damage in patients with voltage-gated potassium channel complex antibody-associated limbic encephalitis. Brain. 2013;136(Pt 8):2474–85. doi:10.1093/brain/awt129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gallagher P, Neave N, Hamilton C, Gray JM. Sex differences in object location memory: some further methodological considerations. Learn Individ Differ. 2006;16(4):277–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Postma A, De Haan EH. What was where? memory for object locations. Q J Exp Psychol Sect A. 1996;49(1):178–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Eals M, Silverman I. The hunter-gatherer theory of spatial sex differences: proximate factors mediating the female advantage in recall of object arrays. Ethol Sociobiol. 1994;15(2):95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lewin C, Wolgers G, Herlitz A. Sex differences favoring women in verbal but not in visuospatial episodic memory. Neuropsychology. 2001;15(2):165–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (NRF-2015R1D1A1A01059743).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul, South Korea

    Jinsick Park, Ga In Shin, Young Min Park, In Young Kim & Dong Pyo Jang

Authors
  1. Jinsick Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ga In Shin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Young Min Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. In Young Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Dong Pyo Jang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dong Pyo Jang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, J., Shin, G.I., Park, Y.M. et al. Sex differences of cognitive load effects on object-location binding memory. Biomed. Eng. Lett. 7, 305–309 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-017-0038-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13534-017-0038-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation