Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35199322›Full record

ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2022

Effects of item distinctiveness on the retrieval of objects and object-location bindings from visual working memory.

Yuri A Markov, Igor S Utochkin

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. 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
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. The influence of categorical stimuli on relational memory binding.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.)
    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.

Yuri A MarkovHSE University, Moscow, Russia. yuamarkov@gmail.com.
Igor S UtochkinHSE University, Moscow, Russia.

Funding

Basic Research Program of the National Research University Higher School of Economics in 2020 RS-60
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Visual working memory (VWM) is prone to interference from stored items competing for its limited capacity. Distinctiveness or similarity of the items is acknowledged to affect this competition, such that poor item distinctiveness causes a failure to discriminate between items sharing common features. In three experiments, we studied how the distinctiveness of studied real-world objects (i.e., whether the objects belong to the same or different basic categories) affects the retrieval of objects themselves (simple recognition) and object-location conjunctions (information about which object was where in a display, cued recall). In Experiments 1 and 2, we found that distinctiveness did not affect memories for objects or for locations, but low-distinctive objects were more frequently reported at "swapped" locations that originally contained other objects, showing object-location memory swaps. In Experiments 3 we found that observers swapped the location of a tested object with another object from the same category more frequently than with any of the objects from another category. This suggests that more similar studied objects cause more retrieval competition in object-location judgments than in simple recognition. Additionally, we discuss a possible role of categorical labeling of locations that can support object-location retrieval when the studied objects are highly distinct.

Indexed as

Memory, Short-TermMental RecallCuesHumansJudgmentRecognition, PsychologyVisual Perceptionmemory distinctivenessobject-location memoryrecognition memoryswap errorsvisual working 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.