ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Was the fruit in front of me or near the river? Biological relevance and reference frame preferences in object-location memory across the lifespan.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spatial memory research has traditionally focused on how environmental features shape the use of egocentric and allocentric reference frames, with little attention to the role of the objects themselves. Here, using two datasets collected with a virtual reality object-location memory task, we investigated whether the biological relevance of objects modulates spatial memory performance depending on the reference frame used at retrieval. Participants encoded the positions of biological entities and artifacts and retrieved them using either egocentric or allocentric recall cues. In Study 1, young adults (N = 37) showed a significant interaction between object category and recall cue: biological entities were recalled more accurately under allocentric than egocentric retrieval, while artifacts showed the opposite pattern, though the category difference was significant only under allocentric retrieval. In Study 2, older adults and patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment (N = 80) showed a preserved biological advantage in overall spatial performance, whereas the interaction with recall cue was no longer observed, a pattern consistent with the reduced allocentric contribution typically associated with aging. These findings provide initial evidence that object categories may shape the retrieval of spatial locations.
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.