Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38846743›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2024

Improving associative memory in younger and older adults with unitization: evidence from meta-analysis and behavioral studies.

Zejun Liu, Yujuan Wang, Yajun Zhu, Jing Yuan, Wei Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 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

5 authors.

Zejun LiuDepartment of Psychology, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai, China.
Yujuan WangIntellectual Property School, Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing, China.
Yajun ZhuKangbai Hospital, Hangzhou, China.
Jing YuanCollege of Nursing, Hebei University, Baoding, China.
Wei LiuDepartment of Psychology, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The finding that familiarity can support associative memory by unitizing the to -be-learned items into a novel representation has been widely accepted, but its effects on overall performance of associative memory and recollection are still controversial. Methods: The current study aims to elucidate these discrepancies by identifying potential moderating factors through a combined approach of meta-analysis and behavioral experiment. Results: Results consistently showed that changes in the level of unitization and age groups were two important moderators. Specifically, unitization enhanced younger and older adults' associative memory and its supporting processes (i.e., familiarity and recollection) when the level of unitization between studied and rearranged pairs was changed. However, when this level remained constant, unitization exhibited no impact on associative memory and familiarity in younger adults, but showed an enhanced effect in older adults. Furthermore, results revealed a marked group difference between younger and older adults in associative memory when the unitization level of noncompound words remained unaltered. Upon breaking this condition, the group difference was reduced by enhancing familiarity or recollection. Discussion: These findings not only clarify some of the inconsistencies in the literature concerning the impact of unitization on associative memory, but also suggest that unitization is a beneficial strategy for reducing group difference in associative memory, with its effectiveness varying according to the level of unitization changes.

Indexed as

age groupsassociative memorychanges in the level of unitizationmeta-analysisunitization

Identifiers

PMID38846743
PMCPMC11153858

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.