Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33674642›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Concurrent visual working memory bias in sequential integration of approximate number.

Zhiqi Kang, Bernhard Spitzer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhiqi KangCenter for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, 14195, Berlin, Germany.
Bernhard SpitzerCenter for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, 14195, Berlin, Germany. spitzer@mpib-berlin.mpg.de.
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous work has shown bidirectional crosstalk between Working Memory (WM) and perception such that the contents of WM can alter concurrent percepts and vice versa. Here, we examine WM-perception interactions in a new task setting. Participants judged the proportion of colored dots in a stream of visual displays while concurrently holding location- and color information in memory. Spatiotemporally resolved psychometrics disclosed a modulation of perceptual sensitivity consistent with a bias of visual spatial attention towards the memorized location. However, this effect was short-lived, suggesting that the visuospatial WM information was rapidly deprioritized during processing of new perceptual information. Independently, we observed robust bidirectional biases of categorical color judgments, in that perceptual decisions and mnemonic reports were attracted to each other. These biases occurred without reductions in overall perceptual sensitivity compared to control conditions without a concurrent WM load. The results conceptually replicate and extend previous findings in visual search and suggest that crosstalk between WM and perception can arise at multiple levels, from sensory-perceptual to decisional processing.

Indexed as

AttentionDecision MakingMemory, Short-TermVisual PerceptionAdultFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33674642
PMCPMC7935854
OpenAlexW3133752938

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.