ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2026
The oblique effect in visual working memory is enhanced by distraction, regardless of tDCS manipulations.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 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
Abstract
The sensory recruitment model suggests that visual working memory (VWM) relies on early visual cortex (EVC), while the alternative frontoparietal account argues VWM representation is independent from EVC. An emerging consensus suggests that VWM relies on a distributed network, with different brain loci serving behavior depending on task demands. To evaluate VWM reliance on EVC vs. parietal cortex, we applied anodal (or sham) transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) to either occipital cortex (Oz) or right posterior parietal cortex (P4) to manipulate cortical representations before an orientation VWM task. To provoke perceptual interference and encourage reliance on parietal cortex, in half of blocks, distractors appeared during VWM delays. We predicted that parietal tDCS would improve VWM capacity to protect representations against ongoing distractions. We also expected that occipital tDCS could either increase memory capacity in nondistraction blocks or increase susceptibility to ongoing distraction. Finally, we reasoned that the oblique effect, which is thought to rely in part on EVC, would be reduced by distractor presence and the accompanying shift to reliance on parietal representations. Contrary to our predictions, neither tDCS manipulation affected VWM reports and the oblique effect was always present but was paradoxically stronger with distraction. These results could suggest reliance on EVC for VWM maintenance, even under distraction. Alternatively, these results could signal loss of fine-grained VWM detail under distraction due to use of representational strategies that maximize task performance rather than veridical orientation representation.
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.