ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026
Memory recall errors reflect interacting sensory and mnemonic representations.
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
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Visual working memory (WM) enables the maintenance of information that is no longer present in the environment. Some accounts propose that WM is supported by abstract representations so that new sensory inputs do not interfere with existing memories. Others posit that early sensory representations are sometimes recruited to maintain memory precision, potentially at the cost of interference caused by new inputs. Here we tested these accounts using an orientation recall task to determine whether memory errors reflect interacting representations of sensory and mnemonic information. We found that adding noise to the memoranda and presenting feature-neutral distractors independently increased mean recall errors. However, distractors that shared a feature with remembered stimuli led to systematic attractive biases such that memory errors were pulled toward the orientation of the distractor. The magnitude of this bias was modulated by both stimulus noise and whether the distractor was behaviorally relevant. Our results demonstrate that WM is susceptible to feature-specific interference, suggesting partial overlap between representations of processed and remembered stimuli.
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.