ArticleMemory & cognition2026
Strategic attention to memory: Proportion congruent effects in the episodic flanker task.
Article in Memory & cognition, 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
The episodic flanker task is a memory analog of the perceptual flanker task, designed to assess parallels between attention to memory and perception. Subjects receive lists of six letters followed by probes that contain a cued target and flanking letters, which are the same as or different from the list (list: STVPDR, same probe: STVPDR, different probe: BNYPKL; cued position is underlined). Their task is to say whether the probed letter occupied the cued position in the list. The compatibility effect is the interaction between response and flankers: for "yes" responses, performance is better with same flankers than with different flankers; for "no" responses, performance is better with different flankers than with same flankers. We report another parallel between memory and perception, demonstrating strategic modulation of the compatibility effect by manipulating the proportion of congruent trials. In Experiments 1 and 2, 80% of the trials were congruent or 20% were congruent. Experiments 3 and 4 began with 50% congruent trials and switched to 80% (Experiment 3) or 20% (Experiment 4). Experiment 5 was a perceptual version of Experiment 2. Each experiment showed proportion congruent effects in response time and error rate: the compatibility effect was largest with 80% congruent trials and smallest with 20% congruent. Novel lists were used on each trial to rule out item-specific proportion congruent effects. There was little evidence of conflict adaptation in any experiment. These results support the attentional account of the proportion congruent effect and strengthen the parallels between attention in memory and perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42747704What 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.