ArticleNeuropsychologia2025
Manipulating memory processing during sleep to explore the critical duration of reactivation events.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 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.
- Concurrent Presentation of Memory-Related Odours and Sounds Nullified Sleep Reactivation Benefits.Journal of sleep research · 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
Newly encoded memories are reactivated and consolidated during sleep. However, how the reactivation of a specific memory unfolds over time is poorly understood. What are the temporal dynamics of a single reactivation event within a period of sleep? Does extending a single reactivation opportunity translate to stronger memory benefits? We explored these dynamics by utilizing targeted memory reactivation (TMR), a technique that biases the consolidation of memories via the unobtrusive presentation of memory-associated cues during sleep. Participants learned the on-screen positions of sixty objects, each linked with a unique sound (e.g., cat - meow). Some sounds were then presented during non-REM sleep, with the duration allotted for reactivation causally controlled by varying the timing of the interstimulus interval. TMR did not lead to uniform improvement in memory, and no differences were observed between objects allotted short (2.5 s) and long (7.5 s) reactivation windows. However, memory for objects allotted short windows was impacted by TMR in an encoding-strength-dependent manner, with poorly encoded objects benefiting the most. Classification models trained on EEG data revealed memory reactivation that was time-locked to sound onset during sleep, and this measure of reactivation was linked with memory gains one week later. We did not find evidence for reactivation that extended beyond the time window immediately after sound onset (<2 s). Although our results are not entirely conclusive, they suggest that the critical processes supporting memory consolidation conclude within <2 s after reactivation onset and that extended reactivation windows do not confer additional benefits.
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.