Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30925185›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Reinstating verbal memories with virtual contexts: Myth or reality?

Michel Juhani Wälti, Daniel Graham Woolley, Nicole Wenderoth

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Michel Juhani WältiDepartment of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-3478-8110
Daniel Graham WoolleyDepartment of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Nicole WenderothDepartment of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When learning new information, contextual information about the encoding situation is stored in addition to the focal memory content. Later, these strings of extra information can help retrieve the learned content as demonstrated by experiments where contextual cues from an encoding situation facilitate remembering and improve memory performance when reinstated during retrieval. This context-dependent memory effect has been investigated over the course of several decades and has been demonstrated with many different types of contexts. Based on this, the widely held belief is that context-dependent memory is a strong and robust effect, with transferable substance for everyday learning and potential clinical applications. Here we report the results of a multi-study design investigating the influence of reinstated visual contexts on memory performance. Data from 120 participants were included in three studies comprising a variety of visual cues. We show convincingly that even rich, salient and fully surrounding visual contexts provided by virtual reality are not sufficient to induce effects of context-dependency in a free recall memory task. We also investigated contextual modulation of oscillatory brain activity in order to test the effect of reinstated neural contexts, which failed to evoke a robust effect when re-tested in an internal conceptual replication study. Moreover, a Bayesian sequential statistical analysis revealed moderate to strong evidence against the hypothesis that reinstatement of visual contexts benefits free recall memory tasks indicating that effects are small and may not be suitable for transfer into everyday learning.

Indexed as

BrainCuesFemaleHumansMaleMental RecallVisual PerceptionYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30925185
PMCPMC6440692

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.