Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42163008›Full record

ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2026

Spontaneous Mnemonic Strategy Use Under Proactive Interference Is Related to Better Recall But Does Not Protect from Accumulating Interference.

Matti Laine, Tilda Eräste, Anton Kunnari

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Matti LaineDepartment of Psychology, Åbo Akademi University, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-4529-4965
Tilda ErästeDepartment of Psychology, Åbo Akademi University, Finland.
Anton KunnariDepartment of Psychology and Logopedics, University of Helsinki, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Proactive interference (PI) is a key mechanism in forgetting, making it important to examine factors that may alleviate its detrimental effects. In a preregistered online study with 207 English-speaking 18- to 60-year-old adults, we probed block-by-block spontaneous mnemonic strategy use in a categorised word list recall task with increasing PI, followed by release from PI. Based on the blockwise self-reports, participants were classified as no strategy users, maintenance strategy users (e.g., repetition), or manipulation strategy users (e.g., grouping, creating a story). Strategy users formed a majority and showed better recall than no strategy users, with the highest recall rates in manipulation strategy users. The detrimental effects of PI on word recall were similar in the three subgroups. Self-reports suggested increased shifts of the selected strategy when moving from the last PI block to release from PI. Altogether, the present results indicate that self-generated memory strategies are (a) common in adults, (b) flexibly used when faced with a qualitative change in task demands, (c) associated with better memory performance especially concerning more sophisticated strategies involving mental manipulation of the memoranda, but (d) do not prevent the buildup of PI as they may not provide enough differentiation between current and previous category members.

Indexed as

memory strategymnemonicsproactive interferenceword list recall

Identifiers

PMID42163008
PMCPMC13675575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.