Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39035074›Full record

ArticleJournal of cognition2024

Keeping the Time: The Impact of External Clock-Speed Manipulation on Time-Based Prospective Memory.

Gianvito Laera, Giovanna Mioni, Sandrine Vanneste, Patrizia Silvia Bisiacchi, Alexandra Hering, Matthias Kliegel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Gianvito LaeraCognitive Aging Lab (CAL), Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0589-7334
Giovanna MioniDepartment of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1212-4591
Sandrine VannesteUMR CNRS CeRCA 7295 -Universitéde Tours, Tours, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9295-4677
Patrizia Silvia BisiacchiDepartment of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2760-8000
Alexandra HeringCognitive Aging Lab (CAL), Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7952-9032
Matthias KliegelCognitive Aging Lab (CAL), Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2001-2522

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies have suggested that time monitoring is important for appropriate time-based prospective memory (TBPM). However, it is still unknown if people actively use internal timing processes to monitor the approaching target time, and whether they do so by tracking the duration between clock digits, or by counting and matching the numerical progression of clock ticks' digits with the target time. Therefore, in the present study, we investigated whether a manipulation of the external time affected time monitoring and TBPM performance. In two experiments, participants performed two identical TBPM tasks: a first TBPM block with no clock-speed manipulation followed by a second TBPM block, where the clock-speed was manipulated as faster or slower (experimental conditions) or normal (control condition). The results showed that only participants in the slower clock condition increased time monitoring in the second compared to the first TBPM block (

Indexed as

attentionexternal clock-speedprospective memorytime monitoringtime passage

Identifiers

PMID39035074
PMCPMC11259119

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.