Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29915793›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in behavioral sciences2017

The Persistence of Memory: How the Brain Encodes Time in Memory.

Sundeep Teki, Bon-Mi Gu, Warren H Meck

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. The neural bases for timing of durations.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Timing the "magical number seven": Presentation rate and regularity affect verbal working memory performance.International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sundeep TekiDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Bon-Mi GuDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
Warren H MeckDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 106084
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Time and memory are inextricably linked, but it is far from clear how event durations and temporal sequences are encoded in memory. In this review, we focus on resource allocation models of working memory which suggest that memory resources can be flexibly distributed amongst several items such that the precision of working memory decreases with the number of items to be encoded. This type of model is consistent with human performance in working memory tasks based on visual, auditory as well as temporal stimulus patterns. At the neural-network level, we focus on excitatory-inhibitory oscillatary processes that are able to encode both interval timing and working memory in a coupled excitatory-inhibitory network. This modification of the striatal beat-frequency model of interval timing shows how memories for multiple time intervals are represented by neural oscillations and can also be used to explain the mechanisms of resource allocation in working memory.

Identifiers

PMID29915793
PMCPMC6004118

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.