Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42722960›Full record

ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2026

Attention to memory: Asymmetric enhancement of mnemonic features in auditory working memory.

David Peita, Sung-Joo Lim

Abstract read
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.

David PeitaDepartment of Psychology, Binghamton University, 4400 Vestal Parkway E, Binghamton, NY, 13902, USA.
Sung-Joo LimDepartment of Psychology, Binghamton University, 4400 Vestal Parkway E, Binghamton, NY, 13902, USA. sungjoo@binghamton.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5856-3269

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Models of auditory attention propose that multiple sound features are integrated into a perceptual object and that selective attention enhances the fidelity of these object-based representations. Similar attentional mechanisms appear to operate on representations held in auditory working memory, yet evidence has largely focused on a single feature. Thus, it remains unknown whether redirecting attention to an auditory memory object enhances multiple, distinct features bound to that object, or whether such enhancement varies across features depending on modality-specific biases or prior knowledge of the to-be-probed feature. Here, we investigated whether retrospective attention improves the mnemonic fidelity of two features-pitch and spatial location-associated with speech objects using psychophysical modeling. Participants encoded two syllables varying in both pitch and location and received valid (vs. neutral) retroactive cues during retention. They then judged a change in one of the two features of the cued syllable. Two groups performed the same task but differed in whether they knew which feature would be probed. Across groups, valid retro-cues facilitated faster judgments of both features, with larger benefits when the to-be-probed feature was known. However, cue-related improvements in accuracy and perceptual precision emerged only for pitch, not spatial location, regardless of feature awareness. This asymmetry suggests that retrospective attention does not uniformly enhance all features of auditory memory objects, but favors auditory identity-related features, such as pitch, over spatial information. These findings demonstrate that attention and memory interact differently across feature dimensions, revealing limits on how object-based attention operates over auditory working memory.

Indexed as

AttentionAuditory PerceptionMemory, Short-TermPitch PerceptionSpeech PerceptionAdultCuesFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultAttention to memoryAuditory objectsAuditory working memoryMemory precision

Identifiers

PMID42722960
PMCPMC13562329

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.