ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2024
The resolution of proactive interference in a novel visual working memory task: A behavioral and pupillometric study.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contributions from Long-Term Memory Explain Superior Visual Working Memory Performance with Meaningful Objects.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Contributions from Long-Term Memory Explain Superior Visual Working Memory Performance with Meaningful Objects.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The resolution of proactive interference in a novel visual working memory task: A behavioral and pupillometric study.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2024Article
- Can't get it out of my head: Proactive interference in the visual working memory of 3- to 8-year-old children.Developmental psychology · 2024Article
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
Proactive interference (PI) occurs when previously learned information impairs memory for more recently learned information. Most PI studies have employed verbal stimuli, while the role of PI in visual working memory (VWM) has had relatively little attention. In the verbal domain, Johansson and colleagues (2018) found that pupil diameter - a real-time neurophysiological index of cognitive effort - reflects the accumulation and resolution of PI. Here we use a novel, naturalistic paradigm to test the behavioral and pupillary correlates of PI resolution for what-was-where item-location bindings in VWM. Importantly, in our paradigm, trials (PI vs. no-PI condition) are mixed in a block, and participants are naïve to the condition until they are tested. This design sidesteps concerns about differences in encoding strategies or generalized effort differences between conditions. Across three experiments (N = 122 total) we assessed PI's effect on VWM and whether PI resolution during memory retrieval is associated with greater cognitive effort (as indexed by the phasic, task-evoked pupil response). We found strong support for PI's detrimental effect on VWM (even with our spatially distributed stimuli), but no consistent link between interference resolution and effort during memory retrieval (this, even though the pupil was a reliable indicator that higher-performing individuals tried harder during memory encoding). We speculate that when explicit strategies are minimized, and PI resolution relies primarily on implicit processing, the effect may not be sufficient to trigger a robust pupillometric response.
Indexed as
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.