ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Reward-based prioritization in working memory is distinct from recency and due to a resource trade-off.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 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.
- Reward-based prioritization and perceptual feature effects on attentional flexibility in working memory.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prioritized items within working memory often show higher accuracy or faster response times at test. This prioritization benefit is thought to reflect the memory representation being within the focus of attention. The literature on prioritization effects lacks consistency in whether prioritization benefits manifest as a benefit to speed, accuracy, or both, implying that some findings may reflect a speed-accuracy tradeoff rather than improved memory representation. In the present work, we use drift-diffusion modeling to test two theoretical questions regarding prioritization effects without the possibility of a confounding speed-accuracy tradeoff. First, we test whether prioritization effects rely on shifting limited working memory resources away from non-prioritized items. Second, we test whether prioritization and recency effects are two distinct mechanisms or two ways to enter the focus of attention. We find that prioritization effects do reflect shifts in limited working memory resources and that prioritization and recency are two distinct mechanisms. These findings are augmented by model fits suggesting differential effects of prioritization at the perceptual/motor and cognitive levels.
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.