ReviewHeliyon2023
Novelty-induced memory boosts in humans: The when and how.
Review in Heliyon, 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.
- Neurotransmitters in memory destabilization: An integrative perspective framed by prediction error and novelty.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Review
- Neural and Navigational Features Influencing the Novelty Induced Benefits on Episodic Memory.Hippocampus · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and retention of extremity and junctional tourniquet training among medical interns.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Neurobiophilia.Brain sciences · 2026Review
- Assessing through focus groups the demand, facilitators, and barriers of a cognitive stimulation intervention for healthy older adults.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Drinking to Cope Mediates the Association between Dyadic Conflict and Drinking Behavior: A Study of Romantic Couples during the COVID-19 Pandemic.International journal of environmental research and public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel information potentially signals danger or reward and behavioral and psychophysiological studies have suggested that the brain prioritizes its processing. Some effects of novelty even go beyond the stimulus itself. Studies in animals have robustly shown that exposure to novel stimulation can promote memory for information presented before or after this exposure. Research regarding effects of novelty on memory in humans is lagging, but in the last few years, several studies have emerged that suggest that memory-facilitating effects of novelty also exist in humans. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of these studies. We identified several factors that have been shown to influence whether novelty promotes memory or not, including the timing between the novel experience and the learning events, the involvement with the novel material, and population characteristics (such as clinical diagnosis or age). Finally, we link the behavioral findings to potential neurobiological mechanisms and discuss the relevance of specific findings in light of potential clinical and educational applications that could leverage novelty to improve 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.