ArticlePsychological research2024
Effects of sequential and non-sequential presentation conditions of multiple-stem facts on memory integration and cognitive resource allocation.
Article in Psychological research, 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
What limits the self-generation of new knowledge in the memory integration process? One striking contender is the amount of necessary pieces of information that are dispersed. Specifically, when essential information is scattered across multiple sources/places, it becomes challenging to effectively integrate and generate new knowledge. Most of the studies on memory integration have focused on the study of paired stem facts, but have neglected the exploration of multiple-stem facts. The present study examined college students' performance on memory integration under different conditions of three stem facts. In Experiment 1, participants were exposed to a series of novel, authentic stem facts in which every three relevant ones could be integrated to generate new knowledge. The results of Experiment 1 found that college students could spontaneously generate a new piece of information by integrating two or three separate but related facts. The integration can occur in at least two distinct types due to the different presentation orders of the learning materials: sequential recursive integration and non-recursive integration. College students performed better in sequential recursive integration than in non-sequential recursive integration, and this difference in integration performance is not caused by differences in memory for the stem facts. Based on Experiment 1, Experiment 2 used eye-tracking technology to explore the allocation of internal cognitive resources across different conditions of three stem facts. We found that in non-sequential recursive integration, college students had the longest visual duration and the highest number of fixations on the second stem fact. In sequential recursive integration, there were no other significant differences in the number and duration of visual fixations for the three stem facts. College students paid longer fixations to the second stem fact and the third stem fact in the non-sequential recursive condition than in the sequential recursive condition. Our study suggests that when information is related but cannot be integrated, longer fixation indicates stumbling when dealing with an unresolvable difficulty. When knowledge is presented in a stepwise manner (such as in the sequential recursive integration condition), it results in better semantic memory extension.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39535615What 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.