ArticleCommunications psychology2023
Attractor dynamics with activity-dependent plasticity capture human working memory across time scales.
Article in Communications psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reduced task-switching flexibility in parietal-cingulate and frontal circuits associated with brooding.Cognitive neurodynamics · 2026Article
- Chloride Homeostasis Failure in Human Disease: KCC2/NKCC1 Microdomain Dysfunction as a Driver of Cortical Network Collapse.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Designing Neural Dynamics: From Digital Twin Modeling to Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Bias in Visual Short-Term Memory for Motion Induced by Perceptually Suppressed Distractors.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- The role of prefrontal-hippocampal functional connectivity in schizophrenia-related cognitive dysfunction and the thalamic ventral midline involvement:Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Most cognitive functions require the brain to maintain immediately preceding stimuli in working memory. Here, using a human working memory task with multiple delays, we test the hypothesis that working memories are stored in a discrete set of stable neuronal activity configurations called attractors. We show that while discrete attractor dynamics can approximate working memory on a single time scale, they fail to generalize across multiple timescales. This failure occurs because at longer delay intervals the responses contain more information about the stimuli than can be stored in a discrete attractor model. We present a modeling approach that combines discrete attractor dynamics with activity-dependent plasticity. This model successfully generalizes across all timescales and correctly predicts intertrial interactions. Thus, our findings suggest that discrete attractor dynamics are insufficient to model working memory and that activity-dependent plasticity improves durability of information storage in attractor systems.
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.