ArticleScientific reports2023
Memory precision and age differentially predict the use of decision-making strategies across the lifespan.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Trade-offs between remembering and online evaluation in retrospective evaluation.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Multistep inference across the human lifespan can be improved with individualized memory interventions.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2026Article
- A compressed code for memory discrimination.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Review
- Cognitive Graphs: Representational Substrates for Planning.Decision (Washington, D.C.) · 2024Article
- A response time model of the three-choice Mnemonic Similarity Task provides stable, mechanistically interpretable individual-difference measures.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
Abstract
Memory function declines in normal aging, in a relatively continuous fashion following middle-age. The effect of aging on decision-making is less well-understood, with seemingly conflicting results on both the nature and direction of these age effects. One route for clarifying these mixed findings is to understand how age-related differences in memory affect decisions. Recent work has proposed memory sampling as a specific computational role for memory in decision-making, alongside well-studied mechanisms of reinforcement learning (RL). Here, we tested the hypothesis that age-related declines in episodic memory alter memory sampling. Participants (total N = 361; ages 18-77) performed one of two variants of a standard reward-guided decision experiment with additional trial-unique mnemonic content and a separately-administered task for assessing memory precision. When we fit participants' choices with a hybrid computational model implementing both memory-based and RL-driven valuation side-by-side, we found that memory precision tracked the contribution of memory sampling to choice. At the same time, age corresponded to decreasing influence of RL and increasing perseveration. A second experiment confirmed these results and further revealed that memory precision tracked the specificity of memories selected for sampling. Together, these findings suggest that differences in decision-making across the lifespan may be related to memory function, and that interventions which aim to improve the former may benefit from targeting the latter.
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.