ArticleJournal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry2020
Client memory and learning of treatment contents: An experimental study of intervention strategies and relationship to outcome in a brief treatment for procrastination.
Article in Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maximizing benefits from evidence-based psychological treatments: Memory support and habit formation as key strategies.Behaviour research and therapy · 2025Review
- Knowledge gain and usage of knowledge learned during internet-based CBT treatment for adolescent depression - a qualitative study.BMC psychiatry · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesClient memory and learning is limited for psychological treatment contents. This study investigated different approaches to support client memory and learning of treatment contents and the relationship between memory and learning of treatment contents and outcome.
methodsAdult participants (n = 428) were recruited through Amazon's Mechanical Turk and randomized to complete one of three versions of a one-session procrastination intervention. Two versions of the intervention included different amounts of memory support strategy types from the Memory Support Intervention. A control version did not include any types of memory support. Memory and learning of treatment contents were assessed immediately after the intervention and one week later. Procrastination and two mechanisms of procrastination (impulsiveness and self-efficacy) were assessed at baseline and one week after the intervention.
resultsContrary to the hypotheses, a version of the intervention with multiple types of memory support strategies was not associated with better memory and learning of treatment contents than a version of the intervention with only one type of memory support strategy or the control intervention. Greater memory and learning of treatment contents predicted improvement in mechanisms of procrastination, but not procrastination itself. LIMITATIONS: The mean level of procrastination in this study was lower than in other treatment studies of procrastination.
conclusionsResults partially support the rationale for the Memory Support Intervention that improving client memory and learning of treatment contents can improve outcome. Findings suggest that the Memory Support Intervention may be simplified to include fewer strategies without compromising efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.