ArticleNature communications2025
Focusing attention in working and long-term memory through dissociable mechanisms.
Article in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does Attending to Information in Working Memory Improve Long-Term Memory?Journal of cognition · 2026Article
- Focusing attention in working and long-term memory through dissociable mechanisms.Nature communications · 2025Article
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
Abstract
We developed an experimental approach to compare how attentional orienting facilitates retrieval from spatial working memory (WM) and long-term memory (LTM), and how selective attention within these two memory types impacts incoming sensory information processing. In three experiments with healthy young adults, retrospective attention cues prioritize an item represented in WM or LTM. Participants then retrieve a memory item or perform a perceptual task. The retrocue is informative for the retrieval task but not for the perceptual task. We show that attentional orienting benefits performance for both WM and LTM, with stronger effects for WM. Eye-tracking reveals significant gaze shifts and microsaccades correlated with attention in WM, but no statistically significant gaze biases were found for LTM. Visual discrimination of unrelated visual stimuli is consistently improved for items matching attended WM locations. Similar effects occur at LTM locations but less consistently. The findings suggest at least partly dissociable attention-orienting processes for different memory types. Although our conclusions are necessarily constrained to the type of WM and LTM representations relevant to our task, they suggest that, under certain conditions, attentional prioritization in LTM can operate independently from WM. Future research should explore whether similar dissociations extend to non-spatial or more complex forms of LTM.
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.