Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33415712›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2021

Effect of attentional selection on working memory for depth in a retro-cueing paradigm.

Zhuolun Li, Mengxuan Tong, Shiting Chen, Jiehui Qian

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Common Neural Mechanisms Control Attention and Working Memory.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  4. The Short-Term Retention of Depth.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
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

4 authors.

Zhuolun LiDepartment of Psychology, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510006, China.
Mengxuan TongDepartment of Psychology, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510006, China.
Shiting ChenDepartment of Psychology, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510006, China.
Jiehui QianDepartment of Psychology, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, 510006, China. qianjh3@mail.sysu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5534-5714

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that the temporary storage and manipulation of depth information (working memory for depth; WMd) is largely different from that of visual information in a 2D context (visual working memory; VWM). Although there has been abundant evidence on VWM showing that cueing a memory item during retention could bias attention to its internal representation and thus improves its memory performance (a retro-cue effect), it is unknown whether such an effect differs for WMd that is nested in a 3D context compared with that in a conventional 2D context. Here, we used a change detection task to investigate the effect of attentional selection on WMd by testing several types of retro-cue. The memory array consisted of items positioned at various stereoscopic depth planes, and a cue was presented during retention. Participants needed to make judgments on whether the depth position of target (one memory item) had changed. Our study showed reliable valid retro-cue benefits but no invalid retro-cue cost, indicating that the relational information may be registered in WMd to prevent a strategical removal of the unattended item. There was also a slight improvement in memory performance for cueing depth order compared with that for cueing other feature dimensions or 2D locations. The attentional effect on memory representation in a 3D context is different from that in a 2D context, and the divergence may suggest the distinctive nature of working memory for depth.

Indexed as

CuesMemory, Short-TermCognitionHumansJudgmentVisual PerceptionAttentionRetro-cue effectStereoscopic depthWorking memory

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.