ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Preparing to produce (without production) is sufficient to elicit a behavioral and pupillometric production effect.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The production effect refers to the finding that words read aloud are remembered better than words read silently. Historically, this phenomenon has been explained with reference to distinctive features encoded at study (e.g., auditory and motor elements) being retrieved at test to discriminate between studied and unstudied items, with emphasis placed on features stemming from the act of production itself. Across two experiments, we demonstrate that even anticipation of reading a word aloud is sufficient to improve its memory over silent items. Using a recent variant of the production paradigm involving pupillometry, participants were instructed to withhold their response until a "Go" signal appeared. On "catch" trials this signal never occurred. Despite having not produced the word on a catch trial, participants nonetheless demonstrated both a behavioral (Experiments 1 and 2) and a pupillary (Experiment 2) production effect, although both were of lesser magnitude than on trials requiring actual production. For "Go" trials, the behavioral production effect was evident for both recollection and familiarity; for "catch" trials, the effect was evident only for recollection. These results support recent claims that motivational or attentional factors play a role in the emergence of the production effect, connecting this effect to a broader framework of action-oriented memory enhancement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41563549What 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.