ArticleJournal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance2023
The tradeoff between item and order information in short-term memory does not depend on encoding time.
Article in Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of syllabic constraints on error production in Korean speech: a study of serial order control with practice.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Expectation violation enhances short-term source memory.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- An embedded computational framework of memory: The critical role of representations in veridical and false recall predictions.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Review
- Similar working memory outcomes with successive versus concurrent presentation of tones and colors.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- The Relation Between Attention and Memory.Annual review of psychology · 2024Review
- How are patterned movements stored in working memory?Frontiers in 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Participants can optimize encoding of an immediate verbal memory test for item or for order information, or they can try to be ready for either type of test. Dividing encoding between both kinds of information, however, comes at a cost. Recently, it has been shown that the cost is more severe for order information compared to item information (Guitard et al., 2022). Here, for the first time, we evaluated which factor can better account for this asymmetry by contrasting two hypotheses. According to a rate hypothesis, divided attention affects the rate of encoding more for order than for items. According to an alternative, asymptote hypothesis, divided attention does not affect the rates but diminishes the endpoint, or asymptotic level, of order encoding more than item encoding. In three experiments to distinguish these hypotheses, participants prepared for an item fragment completion test, an order reconstruction test, or both types of tests, in trials with different durations of presentation. Overall, our results were better accounted for by a model which assumes that dividing attention between preparation for item and order testing affects the asymptote of encoding more for order than for items, with no effects on the rates of order or item encoding compared to preparation for a single test. The findings not only replicate our prior results, but also demonstrate that the allocation of attention to item or order processing can be disentangled from the time on task. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
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.