ArticleMemory & cognition2025
Load effect of visual working memory on distractor interference: An investigation with two replication experiments.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Konstantinou et al. (Experiment 1B; Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 76, 1985-1997, 2014) reported that an increase in visual short-term memory (VSTM) load reduced distractor interference in the flanker task. Yao et al. (Experiment 3; Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82, 3291-3313, 2020) replicated the design of Konstantinou et al.'s experiment and showed that the VSTM load did not modulate the distractor interference effect, contradicting the original findings. However, it is unknown whether differences in task-design between the two experiments contributed to the inconsistent results. Therefore, we first replicated the original two studies with Experiment 1 (N = 54) and Experiment 2 (N = 54) and performed a statistical comparison between the data from these two experiments. In a third experiment (N = 28), we incorporated articulatory suppression into the design to exclude possible effects of verbalization. According to the ANOVA analyses, the VSTM load did not change the level of distractor interference in all three experiments, indicating that differences in task design alone do not explain the inconsistency.
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.