ArticleMemory & cognition2024
Does the extension of free time trigger spontaneous elaborative strategies in working memory?
Article in Memory & 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Elaboration has emerged as a potential maintenance mechanism involved in the substantial contribution of long-term memory (LTM) to working memory (WM) performance. The objective of the current study was to determine whether elaborative strategies could be spontaneously implemented under favorable conditions. Across four experiments, the distribution of free-time periods was manipulated in a complex span task, while keeping the total amount of free time and cognitive load constant. As elaboration requires time to be set up, Experiment 1 elicited better WM performance in a condition with fewer long free-time periods compared to a condition with many short free-time periods. However, because this benefit did not persist during delayed recall, the following experiments aimed to further investigate this effect by manipulating factors supposed to modulate elaboration. In Experiment 2, half of the participants received no specific instructions regarding strategies whereas the other half were encouraged to use elaborative strategies. In Experiment 3, the to-be-maintained stimuli did or did not have LTM representations that are essential for elaboration (i.e., words or pseudowords). Finally, the last experiment used a self-strategy report to better understand the nature of the WM maintenance strategies spontaneously employed by participants. Despite a consistent effect of free time manipulation on WM recall, the explanatory assumption of elaboration was challenged by the unexpected lack of effect on LTM recall and on the type of strategy reported. Alternative explanations stemming from well-known factors influencing WM performance are discussed, and emphasis is placed on the potential contribution of direct semantic maintenance in WM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39133437What 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.