Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39251722›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

The neural basis of attentional selection in goal-directed memory retrieval.

Melinda Sabo, Edmund Wascher, Daniel Schneider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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

3 authors.

Melinda SaboLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystraße 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany. sabo@ifado.de.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8585-7115
Edmund WascherLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystraße 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3616-9767
Daniel SchneiderLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Ardeystraße 67, 44139, Dortmund, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2867-2613

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft SCHN 1450/2-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Goal-directed memory reactivation involves retrieving the most relevant information for the current behavioral goal. Previous research has linked this process to activations in the fronto-parietal network, but the underlying neurocognitive mechanism remains poorly understood. The current electroencephalogram (EEG) study explores attentional selection as a possible mechanism supporting goal-directed retrieval. We designed a long-term memory experiment containing three phases. First, participants learned associations between objects and two screen locations. In a following phase, we changed the relevance of some locations (selective cue condition) to simulate goal-directed retrieval. We also introduced a control condition, in which the original associations remained unchanged (neutral cue condition). Behavior performance measured during the final retrieval phase revealed faster and more confident responses in the selective vs. neutral condition. At the EEG level, we found significant differences in decoding accuracy, with above-chance effects in the selective cue condition but not in the neutral cue condition. Additionally, we observed a stronger posterior contralateral negativity and lateralized alpha power in the selective cue condition. Overall, these results suggest that attentional selection enhances task-relevant information accessibility, emphasizing its role in goal-directed memory retrieval.

Indexed as

AttentionElectroencephalographyGoalsMental RecallAdultBrainCuesFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAttentional selectionEEGEpisodic long-term memoryMultivariate pattern analysis

Identifiers

PMID39251722
PMCPMC11385572

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.