ArticlePsychological research2025
The effect of response inhibition on the aftereffects of completed prospective memory.
Article in Psychological research, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aftereffects of completed prospective memory (PM) refer to the phenomenon that, after PM task completion, it interferes with the subsequent task or results in the repetition of the previous intended behavior. Inhibition processing and monitoring processing are two important theoretical perspectives to explain the emergence of the aftereffects of PM. The present study aimed at exploring the processing mechanisms of PM aftereffects. In experiment 1, the response delay time was manipulated during the intention response to assess the role of response inhibition in the aftereffects of PM. In experiment 2, the convenience of response was manipulated by changing different response keys during task response phase, to further examine the effect of response inhibition. The results of Experiment 1 showed that the response speed of the ongoing tasks in the experimental group was slower than that in the control group under the non-delay condition. The results of Experiment 2 also showed that both convenient response group and inconvenient response group had slower response speed than control group. The results of Experiment 1 showed that more commission errors were generated under the delay condition. The results of the ongoing tasks indicate that PM aftereffects involve a controlled processing in both experiments. The results of commission errors in Experiment 1 indicate that the controlled processing involved in PM aftereffects is inhibition rather than monitoring, which supports the inhibition view.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39982513What 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.