ArticleMemory & cognition2026
Expectation-[in]congruence differentially impacts recall and recognition of object features.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. 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.
- Differential effects of contextual congruency on recognition and retrieval of perceptual details.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Retrieval tasks differentially influence memory for object features.Frontiers in cognition · 2026Article
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
Study events that are congruent with our prior expectations are better remembered than expectation-unrelated events. Paradoxically, events that are highly incongruent with expectations are also better remembered. In this study, we explore whether this paradoxical finding persists in object featural memory. Specifically, we examine whether memory for expectation-congruent and incongruent features of objects is differentially impacted by the processes that underlie recall and recognition and the types of information being probed. In three experiments, we manipulated the degree to which object features adhered to people's prior expectations (i.e., colors of objects) and then assessed memory (recall and recognition) for expectation-relevant features (i.e., object-color) and expectation-irrelevant features (i.e., object-shape). While both expectation-congruent and incongruent features were equally well recognized, only expectation-congruent features were better recalled compared to expectation-unrelated features. Furthermore, only strong expectation-congruence created a memory advantage for expectation-irrelevant object features. These findings suggest that in object featural memory, expectation-congruence and incongruence are qualitatively dissociable in their impact on recognition and recall processes. The findings from this work have important implications for cognitive and neuroscientific theories of how prior expectations shape the representation of objects and their constituent features in episodic memory.
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.