Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38568927›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Stochastic attractor models of visual working memory.

W Penny

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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

1 author.

W PennySchool of Psychology, University East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9064-1191

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper investigates models of working memory in which memory traces evolve according to stochastic attractor dynamics. These models have previously been shown to account for response-biases that are manifest across multiple trials of a visual working memory task. Here we adapt this approach by making the stable fixed points correspond to the multiple items to be remembered within a single-trial, in accordance with standard dynamical perspectives of memory, and find evidence that this multi-item model can provide a better account of behavioural data from continuous-report tasks. Additionally, the multi-item model proposes a simple mechanism by which swap-errors arise: memory traces diffuse away from their initial state and are captured by the attractors of other items. Swap-error curves reveal the evolution of this process as a continuous function of time throughout the maintenance interval and can be inferred from experimental data. Consistent with previous findings, we find that empirical memory performance is not well characterised by a purely-diffusive process but rather by a stochastic process that also embodies error-correcting dynamics.

Indexed as

CognitionMemory, Short-TermMental Recall

Identifiers

PMID38568927
PMCPMC10990203

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.