Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42613406›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026

Let it go: How trusted reminders alter intention maintenance.

Connor Dupre, B Hunter Ball

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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.

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

2 authors.

Connor DupreDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, 501 Nedderman Drive, Arlington, TX, 76109, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0006-6487-0963
B Hunter BallDepartment of Psychology, University of Texas at Arlington, 501 Nedderman Drive, Arlington, TX, 76109, USA. Hunter.Ball@uta.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9119-7640

Funding

Using Cognitive Offloading to Mitigate Age-Related Declines in Prospective MemoryR16GM146705 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS ARLINGTON · PI BALL, BRETT HUNTER · 2022 to 2025
$890k
NIGMS NIH HHS R16 GM146705NIGMS NIH HHS R16GM146705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Do prospective memory (PM) reminders support intentions in a duplicative manner that preserves internal maintenance, or in a substitutive manner that reduces internal maintenance when a trusted external store is available? We tested this in a student population (N = 320) by crossing PM reminder reliability (0%, 50%, 100%) and availability (present vs. absent). Thought probes served as a real-time proxy for whether the intention remained in conscious awareness during the retention interval between encoding and retrieval. In Session 1 (trust trials), reminders enhanced performance without reducing PM-related thoughts, consistent with duplicative support. However, after experiencing reliable external support, Session 2 (critical trials) showed that those in the 100% condition reduced PM-related thoughts, redistributed attention to the ongoing task, and showed reduced PM retrieval when reminders were unexpectedly withdrawn. These findings suggest that trusted reminders may influence how intentions are actively maintained and prioritized during the retention interval, providing a lens for observing how memory adapts to changing external support.

Indexed as

AttentionIntentionMemory, EpisodicMental RecallThinkingTrustAdultFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultCognitive offloadingDistributed cognitionMind wanderingProspective memory

Identifiers

PMID42613406
PMCPMC13486017

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.