ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023
Interference between items stored for distinct tasks in visual working memory.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- When similarity is less disruptive: feature-sharing distractors in visual working memory under diffuse attention.Frontiers in cognition · 2026Article
- All identical objects reduce memory load at the late maintenance stage in working memory.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Multifaceted consequences of visual distraction during natural behaviour.Communications psychology · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The action perspective on working memory suggests that memory representations are coded according to their specific temporal and behavioral task demands. This stands in contrast to theories that assume representations are stored in a task-agnostic format within a "common workspace". Here, we tested whether visual items that are memorized for different tasks are stored separately from one another or show evidence of inter-item interference during concurrent maintenance, indicating a common storage. In two experiments, we combined a framing memory task (memorize a motion direction for continuous direction report) with an embedded memory task (memorize a motion direction for a binary direction discrimination) that was placed within the retention period of the framing task. Even though the temporal and action demands were item specific, we observed two types of interference effects between the items: The embedded motion direction was (1) repulsed away and (2) degraded in precision by the motion direction of the item in the framing task. Repulsion and precision degradation increased with item similarity when both items were concurrently held in working memory. In contrast, perceptual and iconic memory control conditions revealed weaker repulsion overall and no interference effect on precision during the stimulus processing stages prior to working memory consolidation. Thus, additional inter-item interference arose uniquely within working memory. Together, our results present evidence that items that are stored for distinct tasks to be performed at distinct points in time, reside in a common workspace in working 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.