SynthesisPsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Shifting reliance between the internal and external world: A meta-analysis on visual-working memory use.
Synthesis in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Stable tendencies in spontaneous working memory usage during flexible behaviour.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Regulating Memory Use: Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity in Natural Tasks.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual working memory (VWM) is a fundamental cognitive capacity that allows us to temporarily hold visual information, but storage is effortful and content-fragile. Rather than loading VWM to the maximum, individuals usually rely on the external world and access information just in time. However, participants do rely on VWM more as access costs to external information increase. This phenomenon is commonly investigated with so-called copy tasks, which differ across paradigms, manipulations, and dependent variables. We here present findings of a meta-analysis into the reliability and consistency of shifts in the assumed trade-off between storing and sampling across manipulations and dependent variables, using data from 28 experiments. We found that all cost manipulations led to substantial shifts from external sampling to storage in VWM. Cost manipulations did not differ in their effect across studies even though such differences are reported within studies. All dependent variables were associated with clear but different strong effects. We argue that the differences observed between indicators are not only due to sensitivity differences but also due to differential aspects of behavior that are measured. New variables and techniques might now pave the way to understanding the trade-off between storing and sampling more in-depth. Collectively, our findings suggest that the reliance on VWM or the external world shifts consistently as access cost is increased, is largely irrespective of cost manipulations, and expresses itself reliably across dependent variables. With this work, we seek to help establish standards and comparability across this growing body of work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39633234What 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.