Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38496465›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024

Top-down task goals induce the retrieval state.

Devyn E Smith, Nicole M Long

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Devyn E Smith

Funding

Multivariate Decoding of the Retrieval Brain State Across CognitionR01NS132872 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI Nicole Marie Long · 2023 to 2026
$1.6M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS132872
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Engaging the retrieval state (Tulving, 1983) impacts processing and behavior (Long & Kuhl, 2019, 2021; Smith, Moore, & Long, 2022), but the extent to which top-down factors - explicit instructions and goals - vs. bottom-up factors - stimulus properties such as repetition and similarity - jointly or independently induce the retrieval state is unclear. Identifying the impact of bottom-up and top-down factors on retrieval state engagement is critical for understanding how control of task-relevant vs. task-irrelevant brain states influence cognition. We conducted between-subjects recognition memory tasks on male and female human participants in which we varied test phase goals. We recorded scalp electroencephalography and used an independently validated mnemonic state classifier (Long, 2023) to measure retrieval state engagement as a function of top-down task goals (recognize old vs. detect new items) and bottom-up stimulus repetition (hits vs. correct rejections). We find that whereas the retrieval state is engaged for hits regardless of top-down goals, the retrieval state is only engaged during correct rejections when the top-down goal is to recognize old items. Furthermore, retrieval state engagement is greater for low compared to high confidence hits when the task goal is to recognize old items. Together, these results suggest that top-down demands to recognize old items induce the retrieval state independent from bottom-up factors, potentially reflecting the recruitment of internal attention to enable access of a stored representation. Significance Statement: Both top-down goals and automatic bottom-up influences may lead us into a retrieval brain state - a whole-brain pattern of activity that supports our ability to remember the past. Here we tested the extent to which top-down vs. bottom-up factors independently influence the retrieval state by manipulating participants' goals and stimulus repetition during a memory test. We find that in response to the top-down goal to recognize old items, the retrieval state is engaged for both old and new probes, suggesting that top-down and bottom-up factors independently engage the retrieval state. Our interpretation is that top-down demands recruit internal attention in service of the attempt to access a stored representation.

Identifiers

PMID38496465
PMCPMC10942341

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.