ArticleMemory & cognition2026
Change detection and repetition detection reflect functionally distinct forms of visual working memory.
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 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.
- Memory's double take: Dissociating two forms of recollection in visual working memory.Memory & 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To examine the roles of change detection and repetition detection in visual working memory, we analyzed three working memory tests expected to rely differentially on these processes. Subjects studied an array of colored squares and then completed three tests. In the complex-probe test, subjects indicated whether a test array matched the study array or if an item's color changed. In the single-probe test, they judged whether a single item's color matched the study color, and in the item recognition test, they identified whether a centrally presented color was studied. We collected same/different confidence responses and analyzed receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) to evaluate memory strength distributions for changed and repeated trials, using a mixture signal detection model to estimate each process. As expected, the complex-probe test showed more high-confidence memory for changed trials, while the item recognition test showed more high-confidence memory for repetitions. The single-probe test showed similar or lower-confidence memory for both trials. Moreover, model estimates indicated that the probability of recollecting a change was higher in the complex-probe than in the item recognition tests, and the probability of recollecting a repetition was higher in the item recognition than the complex-probe tests. The single-probe test showed moderate recollection for both. These results show that change detection and repetition detection are functionally dissociable, with test-type affecting their contributions to working memory. These findings have implications for studying populations, such as aging, that may exhibit impairments in one or the other and raise the question of whether different neural systems underlie these processes.
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.