ArticleBiological psychology2021
Neutral and threatening distracter word stimuli are unnecessarily stored in working memory but do not differ in their degree of working memory storage.
Article in Biological psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Working Memory Performance for Differentially Conditioned Stimuli.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Evidence suggests that threatening stimuli induce attentional biases compared to neutral stimuli, leading to subsequent storage in working memory. The current study examined how threatening versus neutral word distracters influence attention, and how this affects the unnecessary storage of these task-irrelevant stimuli in working memory. We measured the N2pc and contralateral delay activity (CDA), two event-related potentials (ERPs) that index attentional selection and the number of items maintained in WM, respectively, as participants completed a lateralized change detection task using word stimuli. Our results replicated work demonstrating a CDA effect for word stimuli, and found that distracter words are unnecessarily stored in working memory. However, we observed non-significant differences in attentional bias and working memory storage between distracter word conditions, and individual variation in anxiety was not associated with these processes. Bayes Factor analyses supported these null effects, suggesting that differences between neutral and threatening distracter words are unlikely.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.