ReviewHippocampus2025
Evolving Engrams Demand Changes in Effective Cues.
Review in Hippocampus, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A longstanding principle in episodic memory research, known as the encoding specificity hypothesis, holds that an effective retrieval cue should closely match the original encoding conditions. This principle assumes that a successful retrieval cue remains static over time. Despite the broad acceptance of this idea, it conflicts with one of the most well-established findings in memory research: The dynamic and ever-changing nature of episodic memories. In this article, we propose that the most effective retrieval cue should engage with the current state of the memory, which may have shifted significantly since encoding. By redefining the criteria for successful recall, we challenge a core principle of the field and open new avenues for exploring memory accessibility, offering fresh insights into both theoretical, and applied domains.
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.