Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34573266›Full record

ReviewBrain sciences2021

The Mechanisms Underlying Interference and Inhibition: A Review of Current Behavioral and Neuroimaging Research.

Oliver Kliegl, Karl-Heinz T Bäuml

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Oliver KlieglDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Regensburg University, 93040 Regensburg, Germany.
Karl-Heinz T BäumlDepartment of Experimental Psychology, Regensburg University, 93040 Regensburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4966-9288

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The memory literature has identified interference and inhibition as two major sources of forgetting. While interference is generally considered to be a passive cause of forgetting arising from exposure to additional information that impedes subsequent recall of target information, inhibition concerns a more active and goal-directed cause of forgetting that can be achieved intentionally. Over the past 25 years, our knowledge of the neural mechanisms underlying both interference-induced and inhibition-induced forgetting has expanded substantially. The present paper gives a critical overview of this research, pointing out empirical gaps in the current work and providing suggestions for future studies.

Indexed as

human memoryinhibitioninterference

Identifiers

PMID34573266
PMCPMC8467325

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.