Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40667475›Full record

ArticleJournal of memory and language2025

Individual differences in prospective and retrospective memory offloading.

Lauren L Richmond, Lois K Burnett, Julia Kearley, Sam J Gilbert, Alexandra B Morrison, B Hunter Ball

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of memory and language, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Lauren L RichmondDepartment of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Psychology B Building, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2500, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6793-5773
Lois K BurnettDepartment of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Psychology B Building, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2500, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1679-4621
Julia KearleyDepartment of Psychology, Stony Brook University, Psychology B Building, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2500, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6085-314X
Sam J GilbertInstitute of Cognitive Neuroscience, University College London, Alexandra House, 17-19 Queen Square, London WC1N 3AZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3839-7045
Alexandra B MorrisonDepartment of Psychology, California State University, Sacramento, 6000 J Street, Sacramento, CA 95819, USA.
B Hunter BallDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, 701 S. Nedderman Drive, Arlington, TX 76019, USA.

Funding

Using Cognitive Offloading to Mitigate Age-Related Declines in Prospective MemoryR16GM146705 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ARLINGTON · PI BALL, BRETT HUNTER · 2022 to 2025
$890k
NIGMS NIH HHS R16 GM146705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior research focused on the relationship between cognitive offloading and working memory ability in the prospective and retrospective memory domains have produced conflicting results. Specifically, past work in the prospective memory domain has found that individuals with lower working memory capacity (WMC) choose to offload more often and benefit more from offloading than those with higher WMC (Ball, Peper, et al., 2022) while work in the retrospective memory domain has not found a relationship between WMC and the use of or benefit from offloading (Morrison & Richmond, 2020). However, task design across studies differed in several other respects aside from memory domain, making it difficult to discern whether different mechanisms underlie cognitive offloading across domains. The current study aimed to address these discrepancies by introducing similar procedures across offloading tasks. Results revealed that when offloading was required or permitted, participants with varying levels of WMC generally performed more similarly to one another than when the task had to be completed using internal memory alone. In addition, participants with lower WMC generally benefitted more from offloading, particularly under high memory load, compared to those with higher WMC when offloading was required and when participants had free choice about whether and when to engage in offloading. However, neither metacognitive underconfidence in internal memory capability nor lower WMC estimates were associated with increased offloading frequency in either memory domain when participants were permitted to offload. Practical and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed.

Indexed as

Cognitive offloadingProspective memoryRetrospective memoryWorking memory capacity

Identifiers

PMID40667475
PMCPMC12263121

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.