Attention can be allocated in working memory (WM) to select and privilege relevant content. It is unclear whether attention selects individual features or whole objects in WM. Here, we used behavioral measures, eye-tracking, and EEG to test the hypothesis that attention spreads between an object's features in WM. Twenty-six participants completed a WM task that asked them to recall the angle of one of two oriented, colored bars after a delay while EEG and eye-tracking data were collected. During the delay, an orthogonal “incidental task” cued the color of one item for a match/mismatch judgment. On congruent trials (50%), the cued item was probed for subsequent orientation recall; on incongruent trials (50%), the other memory item was probed. As predicted, selecting the color of an object in WM brought other features of the cued object into an attended state as revealed by EEG decoding, oscillatory α-power, gaze bias, and improved orientation recall performance. Together, the results show that attentional selection spreads between an object's features in WM, consistent with object-based attentional selection. Analyses of neural processing at recall revealed that the selected object was automatically compared with the probe, whether it was the target for recall or not. This provides a potential mechanism for the observed benefits of nonpredictive cueing in WM, where a selected item is prioritized for subsequent decision-making.

Capacity limitations in working memory (WM) necessitate the need to effectively control its contents. Here, we examined the effect of cabergoline, a dopamine D 2 receptor agonist, on WM using a continuous report paradigm that allowed us to assess the fidelity with which items are stored. We assessed recall performance under three different gating conditions: remembering only one item, being cued to remember one target among distractors, and having to remember all items. Cabergoline had differential effects on recall performance according to whether distractors had to be ignored and whether mnemonic resources could be deployed exclusively to the target. Compared with placebo, cabergoline improved mnemonic performance when there were no distractors but significantly reduced performance when distractors were presented in a precue condition. No significant difference in performance was observed under cabergoline when all items had to be remembered. By applying a stochastic model of response selection, we established that the causes of drug-induced changes in performance were due to changes in the precision with which items were stored in WM. However, there was no change in the extent to which distractors were mistaken for targets. Thus, D 2 agonism causes changes in the fidelity of mnemonic representations without altering interference between memoranda.