ArticlePsychological review2026
Capacity not required: A long-term memory model that exhibits key signatures of working memory.
Article in Psychological review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strategic attention to memory: Proportion congruent effects in the episodic flanker task.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Selective retrieval boosts memory regardless of prior knowledge.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Spotlight on the past: Focusing attention on long-term memory.Memory & cognition · 2026Article
- Visual recognition memory does not benefit from preserved temporal order from encoding to test.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Capacity not required: A long-term memory model that exhibits key signatures of working memory.Psychological review · 2026Article
- Visual memory.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Review
- The hierarchical levels of information activities in the subject's psychology and cognition.Frontiers in psychology · 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
Because the study of working memory and long-term memory diverged decades ago, views about the diagnostic nature of certain measures within each literature might not be valid. For example, in the study of working memory, it is viewed as critical to show a capacity limit in storage as a way of demonstrating that one is measuring the limited-capacity working memory store and not the unlimited capacity long-term memory store. Although this is a strong logical structure, these hallmarks of working memory might already fall out of existing models of human long-term memory. Here, we show that several of the set size effects often used to validate the assumption that one is studying working memory are also observed as a natural result of the dynamics of contextual models of long-term memory storage and retrieval. Integrating contextual dynamics into a model of visual working memory provides new insight into the nature of interference in short-term visual memory tasks and allows the model to capture the temporal structure of visual experience as it unfolds in time. We discuss how the situation motivates a re-examination of unified models of human memory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
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.