Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36000544›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2022

The reciprocal relationship between episodic memory and future thinking: How the outcome of predictions is subsequently remembered.

Sneh P Patel, Matthew P McCurdy, Andrea N Frankenstein, Allison M Sklenar, Pauline Urban Levy, Karl K Szpunar, Eric D Leshikar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Social feedback biases emerge during recall but not prediction and shift across the development of social anxiety.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

7 authors.

Sneh P PatelUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Matthew P McCurdyUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Andrea N FrankensteinUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Allison M SklenarUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Pauline Urban LevyUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Karl K SzpunarRyerson University, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Eric D LeshikarUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5099-841X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence suggests that memory is involved in making simulations and predictions about the future (i.e., future thinking), but less work has examined how the outcome of those predictions (whether events play out as predicted or expected) subsequently affects episodic memory. In this investigation, we examine whether memory is better for outcomes that are consistent with predictions, or whether memory is enhanced for outcomes that are inconsistent with predictions, after the predicted event occurs. In this experiment, participants learned a core trait associated with social targets (e.g., high in extroversion), before making predictions about behaviors targets would perform. Participants then were shown behaviors the social targets actually performed (i.e., prediction outcome), which was either consistent or inconsistent with predictions. After that, participants completed a memory test (recognition; recall) for the prediction outcomes. For recognition, the results revealed better memory for outcomes that were consistent with traits associated with targets (i.e., trait-consistent outcomes), compared to outcomes that were inconsistent (i.e., trait-inconsistent outcomes). Finding a memory advantage for trait-consistent outcomes suggests that outcomes that are in line with the contents of memory (e.g., what one knows; schemas) are more readily remembered than those that are inconsistent with memory, which may reflect an adaptive memory process. For recall, memory did not differ between trait-consistent and trait-inconsistent outcomes. Altogether, the results of this experiment advance understanding of the reciprocal relationship between episodic memory and future thinking and show that outcome of predictions has an influence on subsequent episodic memory, at least as measured by recognition.

Indexed as

Memory, EpisodicHumansImaginationMental RecallRecognition, PsychologyThinkingepisodic memoryfuture thinkingrecallrecognitionsocial cognition

Identifiers

PMID36000544
PMCPMC9480898

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.