ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Dimension-based retro-cue benefit in working memory does not require unfocused dimension removal.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Color first, space next, orientation last: A temporal comparison of retro-cue effects in visual working memory.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Early or late distractions hurt working memory differently depending on how long you look.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- All identical objects reduce memory load at the late maintenance stage in working memory.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparing retro-cue benefit mechanisms in visual working memory: completely valid vs. highly valid retro-cues.BMC psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Within the maintenance phase of visual working memory (VWM), previous researchers presented retro-cues orienting to a probed dimension across all multidimension stimuli and found a robust dimension-based retro-cue benefit (RCB): VWM performance for cued dimension was better than no/neutral-cue baseline. This improvement is often attributed to the prioritization of information related to the focused dimension and the removal of information related to the unfocused dimension from VWM. However, it remains unclear whether the removal of the uncued dimension is necessary to observe this dimension-based RCB. Methods: In the current study, we first manipulated the number of retro-cues to investigate this question. We used colored, oriented bars as stimuli and two sequential retro-cues oriented to different dimensions in the double-cue condition. The last presented cue in each trial was always valid. Therefore, the unfocused dimension in the first cue display was probed in double-cue trials. Experiment 1 adopted change detection tasks and three cue type conditions (no-cue, single-cue, double-cue). Experiment 2 divided the single-cue condition into early- and late- cue conditions, using recall tasks to elevated probe precision. Experiment 3 further added double-neutral and double-same cue types and eliminated the different influences of post-memory masks on each dimension respectively. Results: Results across these experiments showed a robust pattern of no worse performances for the double-cue condition than for the single-cue condition. Discussion: Because the dimension-based single cue benefit was observed especially in early-cue trials, we supposed that the dimension-based RCB does not require removing the unfocused dimension from VWM.
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.