ArticleScientific reports2026
Naturalistic actions modulate Working Memory prioritization in immersive virtual reality.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human cognition is inherently action-oriented, enabling flexible interaction with dynamic environments. Working Memory (WM) links perception and action by maintaining task-relevant representations. Although evidence indicates that action planning can influence what information is maintained in WM, traditional laboratory paradigms often rely on simplified response demands that only partially capture real-world perception-action coupling. Here, we investigated whether the nature of actions modulate the prioritization of sensory representations in WM. Using a virtual reality task, participants responded either via a simple button press or by performing a more naturalistic object movement, while a spatial cue indicated the item most likely to be probed (pre-cued or retro-cued). Accuracy was analyzed using generalized linear mixed-effects models. Naturalistic actions yielded higher accuracy than button presses. Critically, this advantage was confined to validly cued items. Together, these findings suggest that the action context associated with a representation can modulate the behavioral benefits of WM prioritization. More broadly, the study highlights immersive virtual reality as a valuable tool for investigating WM under ecologically grounded yet experimentally controlled conditions, enabling the characterization of functional properties that would be difficult to capture with traditional laboratory paradigms.
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.