Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40021591›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2025

Slowdown vs. breakdown of memory recall by retrieval stopping.

Satoru Nishiyama, Randall C O'Reilly, Satoru Saito

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. 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.

Satoru NishiyamaGraduate School of Education, Kyoto University, Sakyo-Ku, Kyoto, Yoshidahonmachi, 606-8501, Japan. nishiyama.satoru.73z@kyoto-u.jp.
Randall C O'ReillyDepartment of Psychology, University of California, 135 Young Hall, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, USA.
Satoru SaitoGraduate School of Education, Kyoto University, Sakyo-Ku, Kyoto, Yoshidahonmachi, 606-8501, Japan. saito.satoru.2z@kyoto-u.ac.jp.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Think/No-Think studies have shown that people can prevent memories from coming up to their mind by explicitly attempting to not think of them. However, there is an important limitation in the measures typically used: binary recall vs. no-recall accuracy under a specific time deadline. In this study, we instead focused on recall latency with a longer response window to accommodate a wider range of recall latencies. We found in Experiment 1 that direct suppression in the standard No-Think condition had a relatively uniform, graded effect, slowing the recall process in such a way that more recall failures occur with a short deadline, but a longer deadline (10 s) allows for successful recall at rates comparable to a baseline condition. In Experiment 2, thought substitution also caused the slowdown of the recall despite still lower recall rate than a baseline in 10 s. These results suggest that memory recall is subject to graded impairment across all items in a consistent manner instead of the breakdown of recall among a subset of memories. For understanding forgetting by retrieval stopping, excessive use of recall rate should be avoided, and recall latency is a potential alternative.

Indexed as

Inhibition, PsychologicalMental RecallThinkingAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultInhibitionInterferenceRecall latencyRetrieval stoppingThink/No-Think

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.