ArticleMemory & cognition2024
Connecting working and long-term memory: Bayesian-hierarchical multinomial model-based analyses reveal storage next to retrieval differences.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Individual differences in working memory capacity (WMC) are correlated with long-term memory (LTM) differences. Whether this is because high-WMC individuals encode more effectively, resulting in better LTM storage, or because they better retrieve information from LTM is debated. In two experiments, we used Bayesian-hierarchical multinomial modeling to correlate participant-level storage and retrieval processes from LTM recall to WMC abilities estimated from operation and symmetry complex span tasks. In Experiment 1, we presented participants with 20 consecutive words, including semantically associated pairs (e.g., knife and fork), to assess LTM processes. Participants received standard (n = 242) or associative-storage instructions (n = 222) and then completed a free recall task. In Experiment 2, we instructed participants (N = 239) to memorize 40 cue-target words as pairs before completing free and cued recall tasks. Correlations with WMC emerged with storage and retrieval processes and only when an associative storage strategy was instructed (Experiment 1). When associative processing was inherent to the task (Experiment 2), only the associative storage, not the retrieval advantage, replicated. The strategy reports suggest that high-WMC individuals use associative encoding strategies more effectively, resulting in better storage in LTM.
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.