ReviewTrends in cognitive sciences2024
Is working memory domain-general or domain-specific?
Review in Trends in cognitive sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Meta-Analytic Review of the Short-Term Effects of Media Exposure on Children's Attention and Executive Functions.Developmental science · 2025Pooled it
- Motor working memory.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026Review
- Does working memory independently influence language development in bilingual children? A 30-year reflection.Brain and language · 2025Review
- Neural structural underlying audiovisual working memory and visual dominance under cognitive load.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Understanding working memory as a facilitator of math problem-solving: Offloading as a potential strategy.The British journal of educational psychology · 2025Article
- Cerebellar and subcortical contributions to working memory manipulation.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Neural Distinction between Visual Word and Object Recognition: An fMRI Study Using Pictographs.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025Article
- Why does the brain matter for education?The British journal of educational psychology · 2025Article
- Effort drives saccade selection.eLife · 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
Given the fundamental role of working memory (WM) in all domains of cognition, a central question has been whether WM is domain-general. However, the term 'domain-general' has been used in different, and sometimes misleading, ways. By reviewing recent evidence and biologically plausible models of WM, we show that the level of domain-generality varies substantially between three facets of WM: in terms of computations, WM is largely domain-general. In terms of neural correlates, it contains both domain-general and domain-specific elements. Finally, in terms of application, it is mostly domain-specific. This variance encourages a shift of focus towards uncovering domain-general computational principles and away from domain-general approaches to the analysis of individual differences and WM training, favoring newer perspectives, such as training-as-skill-learning.
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.