ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2024
Consequences of curiosity for recognition memory in younger and older adults.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The relationship between epistemic curiosity and successful aging in older adults: the role of self-perceptions of aging and perceived social support.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Curiosity in younger and older adults: the relationship between information value and memory.Frontiers in cognition · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Older adults are more prone to false recognition than younger adults, particularly when new information is semantically related to old information. Curiosity, which guides information-seeking behavior and has beneficial effects on memory across the life span, may offer protection against false recognition, but this hypothesis has not been tested experimentally to date. The current study investigated the effect of curiosity on correct and false recognition in younger and older adults (total N = 102) using a trivia paradigm. On Day 1 of the study, participants encoded trivia questions and answers while rating their curiosity levels. On Day 2, participants completed a surprise old/new recognition test in which they saw the same trivia questions. Half of the questions were paired with old (correct) answers, and half were paired with new (incorrect) answers. New answers were either semantically related or unrelated to correct answers. For both age groups, curiosity at encoding was positively associated with correct recognition. For older adults, semantically related lures produced more false recognition than unrelated lures. However, this effect was mitigated by curiosity, such that older adults were less likely to endorse semantically related lures for high- versus low-curiosity questions. Overall, these results extend prior findings of curiosity-related memory benefits to the domain of recognition memory, and they provide novel evidence that curiosity may protect against false memory formation in older adults.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38097888What 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.