ArticleScientific reports2026
Cognitive offloading reduces internal memory processing in children.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Task demands often exceed internal limitations, leading people to use external memory aids. When adults save information externally, they refrain from encoding it internally, leading to internal memory loss. We investigated whether children show similar effects. Forty 10-11-year-old children and 40 adults completed a baseline memory test and three experimental blocks, in which they studied lists of 20 words they saved externally by writing them down. In the first two blocks, participants used the list to retrieve the words during test, whereas in the final block, the written list was unavailable at test. Half of the participants were informed beforehand about the list unavailability and therefore relied on internal memory, while the remaining participants expected list access. Baseline measures indicated better overall performance among adults, yet the age-related performance differences were eliminated when children and adults used the written list during test. In the final block, children and adults who expected the list’s availability recalled fewer words than participants who relied on internal memory and reported using fewer encoding strategies. Thus, 10-11-year-olds who expect external aid availability reduce internal encoding of externalized information, leading to internal costs. We discuss how these effects could impact children’s knowledge acquisition and memory development.
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.