ArticleNeuropsychologia2025
The effects of targeted reactivation on memories cued once or multiple times during a nap.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
During sleep, memory traces are reactivated and consolidated into long-term memory. Discrete reactivation events involve coordinated activity between the hippocampus and neocortex. In this study, we examined whether the number of reactivation events directly translates to benefits to memory. To test this, we used targeted memory reactivation, a technique to selectively bias reactivation for certain memories by presenting non-invasive sensory cues. Participants (N = 31) completed a computerized object-location task, in which 60 images were presented along with related sounds. During non-REM sleep, 40 of these sounds were presented either once (20 sounds) or five times (20 sounds) in an interleaved fashion. Participants then completed another task designed to interfere with the previously encoded spatial memories, before being tested again on the initial object positions. The results showed no significant performance benefits for cued objects regardless of the number of sound presentations. This may be due to the interference task, which substantially increased error rates. Nevertheless, we found differences between the electrophysiological profiles linked with multiple vs. single sound presentation during sleep. Sigma spectral power predicted improvements in performance for the objects cued five times, but not for those cued once. For sounds presented once, benefits from sleep were predicted by post-sound power in the delta band. Although our results did not fully resolve the question of the relationship between the number of reactivation events and subsequent memory benefits, they inform future research using targeted memory reactivation to selectively bias memory during sleep.
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.