ArticleVision (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Eccentricity Constrains Spatial Working Memory Fidelity: Evidence for the Cortical Maps Hypothesis.
Article in Vision (Basel, Switzerland), 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spatial working memory (SWM) has been characterised as a flexible resource that determines the precision with which memoranda are stored. The 'cortical map' proposal predicts that resource allocation, and therefore mnemonic precision, is limited by the availability of cortical space to represent memoranda. This hypothesis was tested using a continuous spatial localisation task in which memory items were presented at three eccentricities and set sizes of 1-8. Localisation error increased systematically with eccentricity, as predicted by the cortical maps hypothesis. Mixture-modelling analyses indicated that the eccentricity effect was primarily driven by increases in imprecision at small set sizes (set sizes 1-5). In contrast, when set size exceeded five items, guessing made an increasingly important contribution to localisation error, suggesting that representations of peripheral locations become more vulnerable to memory failure under high memory loads. Misbinding errors were most prominent for locations nearest fixation, likely reflecting reduced inter-item spacing at small eccentricities. Stimuli were not scaled to compensate for cortical magnification, but the observed increase in imprecision closely matched predictions derived from a cortical magnification function. Together, these findings support the cortical maps hypothesis and indicate that spatial working memory representations compete for limited representational resources within the spatial maps that guide action.
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.