ArticleJournal of cognition2023
Updating, Fast and Slow: Items, but Not Item-Context Bindings, are Quickly Updated Into Working Memory as Part of Response Selection.
Article in Journal of cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inferring latent behavioral strategy from the representational geometry of prefrontal cortex activity.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Working memory updating for free items and for item-to-context bindings: When attention is enough and when gating is needed.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- Working Memory Updating in the Macaque Lateral Prefrontal Cortex.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- The voluntary utilization of visual working memory.Scientific reports · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is commonly held that attending to items facilitates their encoding into working memory (WM). This implies that the content of WM is updated with new input as a consequence of directing attention to it. On the other hand, abundant research shows that WM updating is rather slow and effortful, suggesting that shielding WM representation against incoming input, rather than its updating, is the default. To resolve this discrepancy, we suggest that while updating item-to-context associations is costly, updating a single item is fast and is automatically carried out as part of directing attention to items, for example as part of response selection. Participants performed a choice-RT task, in which stimuli appeared within frames, and needed to update their WM with the most recent red item that appeared in each frame. The need for updating was manipulated, so that some trials required updating and others did not. Experiment 1 (N = 25) showed that updating was slower than not updating with a set-size of two items, that required item-context binding, but faster when the set-size only involved one item. Experiment 2 (N = 28) replicated this finding. Experiment 3 (N = 20) showed that the slower no-update RTs are due to the removal of erroneously updated information. In contrast to previous findings, these results suggest that updating can be effortless and obligatory.
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.