ArticleMemory & cognition2026
On the decay of event-files-Way more complex than previously thought.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Event-files are a central concept in human action control as they integrate perception and action. The basic idea is that event-files comprise internal representations of stimuli, motor programs, and sensory effects of actions that are bound together, maintained for some time, and then ultimately decay. Yet the exact nature of the decay of event-files remains elusive. Most previous studies analyzed the decay only on a very coarse-grained scale typically with only two or three different response-stimulus intervals (RSI). Because available data are inconsistent, the decay function could as yet not be delineated, particularly whether it is linear or resembles a typical forgetting curve. In the present study, we analyzed the decay of event-files using nine different RSIs between 400 ms and 2,000 ms in a large sample (N = 156) of neurotypical participants. If event-file decay mimics the typical forgetting curve, the concept of event-files can be better connected to the memory literature. Using unsupervised cluster analysis, the results showed, however, a more complex pattern. In fact, there were different decay functions across participants with only a subset showing a forgetting curve suggesting that (i) event-file decay functions are modulated by interindividual differences and (ii) that the previously observed power function might be a statistical artifact due to averaging. At least in the time range investigated in this study, event-files decay only for a subset of participants. Possible underlying processes are discussed.
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.