Memory for the final location of a moving target is often displaced in the direction of anticipated target motion, and this has been called representational momentum. How the attention influence the representational momentum is a question of empirical and theoretical interest. Hayes and Freyd’s (2002) experiments the manipulation of attention occurred during presentation of the target and was relatively long in duration, in which forward displacement increased with decreases in attention. Whereas in Kerzel’s(2003) experiment, the manipulation of attention occurred after the target vanished and was relatively short in duration, in which forward displacement decreased with decreases in attention. In an attempt to consider whether methodological differences or effects of attention per se can account for the different results of Hayes and Freyd and of Kerzel, we considered the effects of a spatial cue in the experiments reported here. The cue presented at the same display coordinates of the final position of a horizontally moving target were considered the high-relevant cue; The cue presented at the same display coordinates of the first position of a horizontally moving target were considered the low-relevant cue, The research included two experiments. In experiment l, the high-relevant cue and the low-relevant cue was presented during of target motion. In experiment 2, the high-relevant cue and the low-relevant cue was presented the during the retention interval. Forty-eight undergraduates attended experiments. Each participant was assigned to either the experiment l group or experiment 2 group, who received 168 trials [3(Cue: the high-relevant cue, the low-relevant cue, cue absent) × 2(direction of motion: left, right) × 7(probes: -15,-10,-5, 0, +5, +10, +15) × 4 replications] in a different random order. These experiments resulted in three main findings: First, the high-relevant cue or the low-relevant cue was presented during of target motion or during the retention interval, forward displacement of target decreased, relative to when a cue was absent. Second, presentation of the high-relevant cue during of target motion or during the retention interval decreased forward displacement of the target. Representational momentum was marginally significant, but the high-relevant cue did not eliminate forward displacement of the target. Third, presentation of the low-relevant cue during of target motion interval decreased forward displacement of the target, representational momentum was significant; Presentation of the low-relevant cue during the retention interval, displacement of the target was opposite to the direction of motion. In conclusion, the results of this study indicated that cues provided information regarding the final location of the target, which suggested that representational momentum was a control process. The high-relevant cue played a critical part in localizing target motion, but it did not eliminate forward displacement of the target. This was consistent with hypotheses that representational momentum is at least partly automatic. However, the low-relevant cue presented at different timings or for different durations could have different effects upon the placement. To the further verified the two-process theory of representational momentum.