ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Regulating Memory Use: Individual Differences in Working Memory Capacity in Natural Tasks.
Article in Behavioral sciences (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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Working memory (WM) capacity predicts a wide range of cognitive abilities, yet little is known about how individuals with different WM capacities regulate memory use during natural tasks in which memory use is voluntarily determined. To address this question, we conducted two experiments (N = 120) in which participants completed a copying task and a change-detection task. Experiment 1 manipulated sampling cost to increase reliance on internal memory storage, whereas Experiment 2 manipulated time pressure to increase demands for maintaining consistent memory use. Increasing sampling cost led participants to use more memory but did not make individual differences in WM capacity more apparent in mean memory usage. In contrast, time pressure revealed a reliable association between WM capacity and the consistency of memory usage across sampling episodes. Higher-capacity individuals exhibited more consistent memory use. These findings suggest that WM capacity shapes voluntary memory use not simply by increasing how much information people remember, but by influencing how consistently they regulate memory use under different task demands.
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.