Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40858932›Full record

ArticleCommunications psychology2025

Processing in working memory boosts long-term memory representations and their retrieval.

Melinda Sabo, Daniel Schneider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Communications psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Melinda SaboLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Dortmund, Germany. melinda.sabo2@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8585-7115
Daniel SchneiderLeibniz Research Centre for Working Environment and Human Factors, Dortmund, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2867-2613

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation) SCHN 1450/2-1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prior research has explored how working memory influences the formation of new long-term memories, but its role in modifying existing representations remains unclear. This study examines whether attentional prioritization and testing in working memory enhance long-term memory retrieval and investigates the underlying neural mechanisms. Eighty-six participants completed a three-phase memory task combining a long-term memory-with a working memory retro-cue paradigm. First, participants learned object-location associations. Next, during a working memory task, some objects have undergone attentional prioritization and testing, others have only been tested in working memory. Finally, participants retrieved the object locations from long-term memory. Three key findings emerged: (1) both attentional prioritization and testing in working memory improved long-term memory retrieval; (2) serving as a probe in working memory further contributed to long-term memory enhancement, with benefits observed at behavioral and neural levels; and (3) cross-phase decoding revealed a comparable representational format for location information across task phases, possibly explained by the neural reinstatement of location information across phases. These results suggest that working memory dynamically shapes long-term memory representations, playing a more active and integrated role in long-term memory formation than previously thought.

Identifiers

PMID40858932
PMCPMC12381095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.