ArticleMemory & cognition2025
A semantic strategy instruction intervention aimed at boosting young and older adults' visual working memory capacity.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Towards theoretically understanding how long-term memory semantics can support working memory performance.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Greater semantic availability (meaningfulness) within visual stimuli can positively impact visual working memory performance. Across two experiments, we investigated the effects of semantic availability and, for the first time, semantic strategy instruction on visual working memory performance. Experiment 1 focused on young adults' (aged 18-35 years) strategies during visual matrix task recognition. Results highlighted an existing propensity to report incorporating a semantic strategy. Interestingly, there was no significant effect of semantic availability within the task stimuli. Semantic strategy instruction also did not boost, or indeed hinder, accuracy. Experiment 2 incorporated older adults (aged 60-87 years) and highlighted marked differences in capacity with older age. Greater semantic availability reliably benefitted capacity for young adults only. Furthermore, semantic strategy instruction neither boosted nor hindered capacity, even in older adults. There were also some interesting patterns regarding reported strategy use across groups. Again, participants reported spontaneously using semantic strategies, particularly young adults. However, instruction may have encouraged more frequent use of semantic strategies in older adults. Finally, the results suggest a role for task practice, likely related to strategy development and implementation over time. Future semantic strategy instruction protocols may need to incorporate more extensive training and/or practice to benefit working memory capacity.
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.