ArticleMemory & cognition2021
Commonalities of visual and auditory working memory in a spatial-updating task.
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 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.
- Article
- Modelling Working Memory Capacity: Is the Magical Number Four, Seven, or Does it Depend on What You Are Counting?Journal of cognition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although visual and auditory inputs are initially processed in separate perception systems, studies have built on the idea that to maintain spatial information these modalities share a component of working memory. The present study used working memory navigation tasks to examine functional similarities and dissimilarities in the performance of updating tasks. Participants mentally updated the spatial location of a target in a virtual array in response to sequential pictorial and sonant directional cues before identifying the target's final location. We predicted that if working memory representations are modality-specific, mixed-modality cues would demonstrate a cost of modality switching relative to unimodal cues. The results indicate that updating performance using visual unimodal cues positively correlated with that using auditory unimodal cues. Task performance using unimodal cues was comparable to that using mixed modality cues. The results of a subsequent experiment involving updating of target traces were consistent with those of the preceding experiments and support the view of modality-nonspecific memory.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33616864What 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.