2023
DOI: 10.1016/j.dcn.2022.101192
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Distinct multivariate structural brain profiles are related to variations in short- and long-delay memory consolidation across children and young adults

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
7
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

3
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 127 publications
1
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This divergence in findings regarding the robustness of consolidation may be attributed to the differences in involved memory recollection processes. Recall employed in the current study and recognition employed in Schommartz et al (2023) may impose distinct demands on memory retrieval and storage processes, which may increase with passing time (Craik & McDowd, 1987; Eagle & Leiter, 1964; Freund et al, 1969). For example, during the three-alternative forced-choice task, adults may benefit more from the reactivation of perceptual details (Davis et al, 2010) and from guessing (Freund et al, 1969) compared to children.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…This divergence in findings regarding the robustness of consolidation may be attributed to the differences in involved memory recollection processes. Recall employed in the current study and recognition employed in Schommartz et al (2023) may impose distinct demands on memory retrieval and storage processes, which may increase with passing time (Craik & McDowd, 1987; Eagle & Leiter, 1964; Freund et al, 1969). For example, during the three-alternative forced-choice task, adults may benefit more from the reactivation of perceptual details (Davis et al, 2010) and from guessing (Freund et al, 1969) compared to children.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the final sample size consisted of 32 YC ( M age : 7.14 years, age range: 6.0–8.47 years), 33 OC ( M age : 9.91 years, age range: 9.0–10.96 years), and 38 YA ( M age : 23.43 years; age range: 19.0–30.00; see Table 1 for sample characteristics). We conducted a priori power analysis with WebPower (Zhang & Yuan, 2018) ( f = 0.4, α = .05, 1 − β = .95; effect size based on Schommartz et al, 2023). The analysis revealed a total sample size of 99 participants for between and 98 participants for within effects.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations