Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38744836›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

Children exhibit superior memory for attended but outdated information compared to adults.

Yingtao Fu, Tingyu Guo, Jiewei Zheng, Jie He, Mowei Shen, Hui Chen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Yingtao Fu *Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Tingyu Guo *Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Jiewei ZhengDepartment of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6841-3472
Jie HeDepartment of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. jiehe@zju.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7789-3084
Mowei ShenDepartment of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. mwshen@zju.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7661-2968
Hui ChenDepartment of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. chenhui@zju.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4242-216X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research on the development of cognitive selectivity predominantly focuses on attentional selection. The present study explores another facet of cognitive selectivity-memory selection-by examining the ability to filter attended yet outdated information in young children and adults. Across five experiments involving 130 children and 130 adults, participants are instructed to use specific information to complete a task, and then unexpectedly asked to report this information in a surprise test. The results consistently demonstrate a developmental reversal-like phenomenon, with children outperforming adults in reporting this kind of attended yet outdated information. Furthermore, we provide evidence against the idea that the results are due to different processing strategies or attentional deployments between adults and children. These results suggest that the ability of memory selection is not fully developed in young children, resulting in their inefficient filtering of attended yet outdated information that is not required for memory retention.

Indexed as

AttentionMemoryAdultChildChild, PreschoolCognitionFemaleHumansMaleYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID38744836
PMCPMC11094159

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.