ArticleJournal of vision2022
The role of ensemble average differs in working memory for depth and planar information.
Article in Journal of vision, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence for the Beneficial Effect of Reward on Working Memory: A Meta-Analytic Study.Journal of Intelligence · 2024Article
- Serial dependence: A matter of memory load.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Article
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
The representation of individual planar locations and features stored in working memory can be affected by the average representation. However, less is known about how the average representation affects the short-term storage of depth information. To evaluate the possible different roles of the ensemble average in working memory for planar and depth information, we used mathematical models to fit the data collected from one study on working memory for depth and 12 studies on working memory for planar information. The pattern of recalled depth was well captured by models assuming that there was a probability of reporting the average depth instead of the individual depth, compressing the recalled front-back distance of the stimulus ensemble compared to the perceived distance. However, when modeling the recalled planar information, we found that participants tended to report individual nontarget features when the target was not memorized, and the assumption of reporting average information improves the data fitting only in very few studies. These results provide evidence for our hypothesis that average depth information can be used as a substitution for individual depth information stored in working memory, but for planar visual features, the substitution of target with the average works under a constraint that the average of to-be-remembered features is readily accessible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.