Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31209117›Full record

ArticleLearning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.)2019

Seeing the past: afterglow effects on familiarity judgments are category-specific.

Marlieke Tina Renée van Kesteren, Lianne de Vries, Martijn Meeter

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Marlieke Tina Renée van KesterenSection of Education Sciences and LEARN! Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 BT, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6765-7881
Lianne de VriesSection of Education Sciences and LEARN! Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 BT, The Netherlands.
Martijn MeeterSection of Education Sciences and LEARN! Research Institute, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1081 BT, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5112-6717

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to several computational models, novel items can create a learning mode with dynamics favorable to new learning, and not to memory retrieval. In line with that idea, a new item in a recognition test has been found to create a bias toward calling subsequent items new as well. Here, we tested whether this bias, which we termed the afterglow effect, is indeed caused by a general learning mode, or is caused by perceptual overlap between preceding and current items. In two experiments, we show that a preceding recognition judgment biases the current one, but only if the preceding and current items are of the same perceptual category. In contrast, we did not find strong bias effects from perceptually novel fractal images, as would be predicted if novel items induce a learning mode that then biases recognition judgments. We conclude that the afterglow effect is more likely to reflect perceptual phenomena than a learning mode. We suggest how this can be reconciled with what is known about familiarity at the neural level.

Indexed as

AdultAnalysis of VarianceFemaleFractalsHumansJudgmentLong-Term PotentiationMaleMental RecallModels, NeurologicalModels, PsychologicalPhotic StimulationRecognition, PsychologyYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31209117
PMCPMC6581004

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.