ArticleJournal of sleep research2026
Odor-Cued Targeted Reactivation Was Unable to Selectively Benefit Declarative Memories During Sleep.
Article in Journal of sleep research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Concurrent Presentation of Memory-Related Odours and Sounds Nullified Sleep Reactivation Benefits.Journal of sleep research · 2026Article
- Reactivation during sleep segregates the neural representations of episodic memories.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Declarative memories are reactivated-and thereby consolidated-during sleep. Real-life memories are typically nested hierarchically (e.g., memory for making coffee nested within memory for one's morning routine). We tested the specificity of memory reactivation during sleep in humans: is it limited to low-tier items or does it extend to wider contexts? To test this, we adapted a well-replicated design using targeted memory reactivation, which uses non-invasive sensory cues to preferentially reactivate memories during sleep. Thirty-two participants (18 women and 14 men) learned two sets of object locations, each paired with a unique odour. By cueing one odour during non-REM sleep, we tested whether reactivation would benefit the entire learning context or selectively enhance the cued set. Our results show no overall benefit for the cued set over the non-cued one. A more nuanced, encoding-strength-dependent reactivation effect was observed for the cued category relative to the non-cued one. Whereas previous studies showed that odour presentation increased spectral activity in the sigma range, putatively reflecting sleep spindles, we found a sustained (~15 s) inhibition following presentation. The results indicate that cueing did not uniformly benefit the targeted memories. One explanation for these results is that cueing benefits may have generalised across the learning context as a whole rather than impacting a single set of memories. Moreover, our results provide more evidence that initial encoding strength dictates the extent of reactivation effectiveness.
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.