ArticleCognition2022
Consequences of predictable temporal structure in multi-task situations.
Article in Cognition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reappearing sensory input guides visual working memory prioritization.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- The Ability to Direct Attention in Working Memory Is Not Impaired in Adults With Symptoms of ADHD.Journal of attention disorders · 2025Article
- Neural Dynamics of Reselecting Visual and Motor Contents in Working Memory after External Interference.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- EEG Correlates of Cognitive Dynamics in Task Resumption After Interruptions: The Impact of Available Time and Flexibility.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025Article
- Shifting attention between perception and working memory.Cognition · 2024Article
- Interference between items stored for distinct tasks in visual working memory.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2023Article
- No obligatory trade-off between the use of space and time for working memory.Communications psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In everyday life, we often anticipate the timing of an upcoming task or event while actively engaging in another. Here, we investigated the effects of predictable temporal structure within such a multi-task scenario. In a visual working-memory task, we manipulated whether the onset of a working-memory probe could be predicted in time, while also embedding a simple intervening task within the delay period. We first show that working-memory performance benefitted from temporal expectations, even though an intervening task had to be completed in the interim. Moreover, temporal predictions regarding the upcoming working-memory probe additionally affected performance on the intervening task, resulting in faster responses when the memory probe was expected early, and slower responses when the memory probe was expected late, as compared to when it was temporally unpredictable. Because the intervening task always occurred at the same time during the memory delay, differences in performance on this intervening task result from a between-task consequence of temporal expectation. Thus, we show that within multi-task settings, knowing when working-memory contents will be required for an upcoming task not only facilitates performance of the associated working-memory task, but can also influence the performance of other, intervening tasks.
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.