ArticleScientific reports2022
Encoding tasks moderated the reward effect on brain activity during memory retrieval.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effects of encoding levels on the item and source memory of fearful and disgusting stimuli.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Astrocyte regulation of behavioral outputs: the versatile roles of calcium.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous studies have explored the effects of retrieval reward and depth of processing in encoding on recognition, but it remains unclear whether and how reward and depth of processing during encoding influence recognition. We investigated the effect and neural mechanisms of encoding reward and processing depth on recognition using event-related potentials (ERPs) in this study. In the study phase, participants were asked to perform two encoding tasks: congruity-judgment (deep processing) and size-judgment (shallow processing) in reward and no-reward conditions. The test phases included object (item) and background (source) tests. The results of item retrieval showed that the accuracy of rewarded items was higher than that of unrewarded items only in the congruity-judgment task, and the reward effect (the average amplitudes in the reward condition were significantly more positive than those in the no-reward condition) in the 300-500 and 500-700 ms were greater in the congruity-judgment task than in the size-judgment task. The results of source retrieval showed that the accuracy of rewarded items was higher than that of unrewarded items, that the difference in the size-judgment task was significantly larger, and that the reward effect in the 300-500 and 500-700 ms were greater in the size-judgment task than in the congruity-judgment task. In conclusion, the encoding task moderated the reward effect in item and source memory.
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.