Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36305085›Full record

ArticleTrends in hearing

A Glimpse of Memory Through the Eyes: Pupillary Responses Measured During Encoding Reflect the Likelihood of Subsequent Memory Recall in an Auditory Free Recall Test.

Andreea Micula, Jerker Rönnberg, Patrycja Książek, Reena Murmu Nielsen, Dorothea Wendt, Lorenz Fiedler, Elaine Hoi Ning Ng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Trends in hearing. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Andreea MiculaDepartment of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linnaeus Centre HEAD, Swedish Institute for Disability Research, 4566Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-9155-0715
Jerker RönnbergDepartment of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linnaeus Centre HEAD, Swedish Institute for Disability Research, 4566Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Patrycja KsiążekAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Ear and Hearing, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Reena Murmu Nielsen84686Oticon A/S, Smørum, Denmark.
Dorothea WendtEriksholm Research Centre, Snekkersten, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-3340-1180
Lorenz FiedlerEriksholm Research Centre, Snekkersten, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7892-6917
Elaine Hoi Ning NgDepartment of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linnaeus Centre HEAD, Swedish Institute for Disability Research, 4566Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden.
Oticon Medical (Denmark) · DKLinköping University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of the current study was to investigate whether task-evoked pupillary responses measured during encoding, individual working memory capacity and noise reduction in hearing aids were associated with the likelihood of subsequently recalling an item in an auditory free recall test combined with pupillometry. Participants with mild to moderately severe symmetrical sensorineural hearing loss (n = 21) were included. The Sentence-final Word Identification and Recall (SWIR) test was administered in a background noise composed of sixteen talkers with noise reduction in hearing aids activated and deactivated. The task-evoked peak pupil dilation (PPD) was measured. The Reading Span (RS) test was used as a measure of individual working memory capacity. Larger PPD at a single trial level was significantly associated with higher likelihood of subsequently recalling a word, presumably reflecting the intensity of attention devoted during encoding. There was no clear evidence of a significant relationship between working memory capacity and subsequent memory recall, which may be attributed to the SWIR test and RS test being administered in different modalities, as well as differences in task characteristics. Noise reduction did not have a significant effect on subsequent memory recall. This may be due to the background noise not having a detrimental effect on attentional processing at the favorable signal-to-noise ratio levels at which the test was conducted.

Indexed as

Hearing AidsHearing Loss, SensorineuralSpeech PerceptionHumansMemory, Short-TermMental Recallfree recallpupillary responsessubsequent memory recallworking memory

Identifiers

PMID36305085
PMCPMC9620000
OpenAlexW4307974775

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.