ArticleMemory & cognition2024
Impact of process interference on memory encoding and retrieval processes in dual-task situations.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advancing an account of hierarchical dual-task control: A focused review on abstract higher-level task representations in dual-task situations.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2026Review
- Visual-manual response selection produces dual-task interference in auditory-verbal memory encoding.Psychological research · 2026Article
- Huh, what did they say again? The influence of task interruption position and workload on auditory-verbal memory performance.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dual-tasks at the memory encoding stage have been shown to decrease recall performance and impair concurrent task performance. In contrast, studies on the effect of dual-tasks at the memory retrieval stage observed mixed results. Which cognitive mechanisms are underlying this dual-task interference is still an unresolved question. In the present study, we investigated the influence of a concurrent reaction-time task on the performance in a long-term memory task in two experiments. In Experiment 1, participants performed an auditory-verbal free recall memory task and a visual-manual spatial Stroop task in a single or dual-task condition, either at the encoding or retrieval stage of the memory task. In Experiment 2, we examined the influence of processing conflicts in a concurrent RT task on memory encoding. Both experiments showed detrimental effects on recall accuracy and concurrent RT task performance in dual-task conditions at the encoding stage. Dual-task conditions at the retrieval stage led to a slowdown in recall latency and impaired concurrent RT task performance, but recall accuracy was maintained. In addition, we observed larger Stroop congruency effects in the dual-task conditions, indicating an increased processing conflict. However, in Experiment 2, we analyzed the effect of the processing conflict in a time-locked manner and could not find a significant influence on success of memory encoding. These findings suggest that processes in both tasks share the same limited capacity and are slowed down due to parallel processing, but we could not find evidence that this is further influenced by task-specific processing conflicts.
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.