Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37566215›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2024

Survival processing occupies the central bottleneck of cognitive processing: A psychological refractory period analysis.

Meike Kroneisen, Edgar Erdfelder, Rika Maria Groß, Markus Janczyk

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Meike KroneisenDepartment of Psychology, Rheinland Pfälzische Technische Universität Kaiserslautern Landau, Landau, Germany. kroneisen@uni-landau.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4325-5364
Edgar ErdfelderDepartment of Psychology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Rika Maria GroßDepartment of Psychology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
Markus JanczykDepartment of Psychology, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft ER224/3-1Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft KR 4545/1-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Words judged for relevance in a survival situation are remembered better than words judged for relevance in a nonsurvival context. This survival processing effect has been explained by selective tuning of human memory during evolution to process and retain information specifically relevant for survival. According to the richness-of-encoding hypothesis the survival processing effect arises from a domain-general mechanism-namely, a particularly rich and distinct form of encoding. This form of information processing is effortful and requires limited cognitive capacities. In our experiment, we used the well-established psychological refractory period framework in conjunction with the effect propagation logic to assess the role of central cognitive resources for the survival processing effect. Our data demonstrate that the survival memory advantage indeed relies on the capacity-limited central stage of cognitive processing. Thus, rating words in the context of a survival scenario involves central processing resources to a greater amount than rating words in a nonsurvival control condition. We discuss implications for theories of the survival processing effect.

Indexed as

Mental RecallRefractory Period, PsychologicalCognitionHumansLogicBottleneck modelDual tasksEffect propagationPRPSurvival processing

Identifiers

PMID37566215
PMCPMC10867088

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.