English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Sometimes in conversation, something is said that causes us to want to comment, but before our impending but implicit thoughts can be expressed, the conversation is disrupted. Later, we cannot recall what we wanted to say, but still later, we can. We used the extralist cuing task to model this phenomenon, and across experiments we varied the strength, direction, and directness of the relationship between the retrieval cues and the targeted information. Disruption was varied by switching attention to a different task before testing and by changing the testing context. Such disruptions reduced recall for the target and its implicitly activated memories. Following a disruption, stronger cues that were related to the target or to both the target and its implicit memories were more effective than those that were related to implicit memories. The findings were consistent with a model of long-term working memory that attributes forgetting to a loss of access to what has been activated, which loss is relative to the strength of the retrieval cue. Decay alone does not explain the results, indicating that many models of working memory need to be revised to take the nature of retrieval cues into account.

Disrupting attention: The need for retrieval cues in working memory theories