ArticleJournal of cognition2025
Refreshing Multi-Feature Objects in Visual Working Memory.
Article in Journal of cognition, 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.
- Refreshing Multi-Feature Objects in Visual Working Memory.Journal of cognition · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
"Thinking of" a representation in working memory is assumed to refresh its trace, boosting its accessibility. We previously demonstrated that think-of cues can be used to guide the refreshing of individual features in working memory (e.g., colors, orientations, words), with items refreshed more often being better reproduced in recall tasks. In the present study, we tested whether refreshing modulates the accessibility of multi-feature objects, contributing either to the maintenance of feature bindings or individual features. The "think-of" cues procedure was combined with a recognition task in Experiments 1 (N = 31) and 2 (N = 77) and with a dual-feature report task in Experiment 3 (N = 117). In all studies, participants encoded four colored shapes. During retention, a sequence of three think-of cues was presented, guiding refreshing of the memoranda 0, 1, or 2 times. In Experiments 1 and 2, a colored shape was presented for recognition (50% match and 50% mismatch). Critically, mismatch probes consisted of intrusions (new color with old shape or old color with new shape). Refreshing monotonically improved match-probe recognition, but not the rejection of intrusion probes. In Experiment 3, refreshing increased the correct recall of both features of the same object, whereas the probability of a single correct report remained constant. These results suggest that refreshing acted on the representation of the integrated object. Not refreshed objects, however, did not become more fragile to binding disruption, they mostly lost accessibility in an all-or-none fashion.
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.