ArticleMemory & cognition2024
Proactive interference of visual working memory chunks implicates long-term memory.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Visual working memory (VWM) is a limited cognitive resource that can be functionally expanded through chunking (Miller, 1956). For example, participants can hold an increasing number of colours in mind as they learn to chunk reliably paired combinations (Brady et al., 2009). We investigated whether this benefit is mediated through the in situ compression of VWM representations (Brady et al., 2009) or the offloading of chunks to long-term memory (LTM; Huang & Awh, 2018; Ngiam et al., 2019) by asking if a vulnerability of LTM - proactive interference - influences VWM performance. We adapted previous designs using deterministic (Experiment 1, N = 60) and probabilistic pairings (Experiments 2 and 3, N = 64 and 80, respectively), to include colour pairings that swapped in sequence along with pairings that were consistent in sequence. Generally, participants reported colours from consistent pairs more accurately than from swapping pairs, which we designed to drive interference in LTM (Experiments 1 and 2). The error profiles also pointed to proactive interference between swapping pairs in all three experiments. Moreover, participants who had explicit awareness of frequent colour pairings had higher VWM accuracy, and their errors reflected more proactive interference than their unaware counterparts (Experiment 3). This pattern of long-term proactive interference in a VWM task lends support for accounts of VWM chunking that propose LTM offloading.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38755495What 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.