CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Cognitive Functions and MemoryCognitive Abilities and TestingMemory Processes and Influences

Offloading items from memory: individual differences in cognitive offloading in a short-term memory task

Open access
Morrison, Alexandra B., Richmond, Lauren L.·2020·Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
DOI 10.1186/s41235-019-0201-4PMC PMC6942100
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Cognitive offloading refers to the act of reducing the mental processing requirements of a task through physical actions like writing down information or storing information on a cell phone or computer. Offloading can lead to improved performance on ongoing tasks with high cognitive demand, such as tasks where multiple pieces of information must be simultaneously maintained. However, less is known about why some individuals choose to engage in offloading and under what conditions they might choose to do so. In the present study, offloading behavior is investigated in a short-term memory task requiring memory for letters. The present study is a replication and extension of a previous study conducted by Risko and Dunn, and tests the new prediction that individuals with lower working memory capacity will be more likely to offload. Here, we find that offloading information confers a performance advantage over relying on internal memory stores, particularly at higher memory loads. However, we fail to observe that those with poorer memory abilities have a greater propensity for offloading or benefit more from it. Instead, our findings suggest that cognitive offloading may be a valid compensatory strategy to improve performance of memory-based tasks for individuals with a wide range of memory ability.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

In a registered replication and extension of Risko and Dunn (2015), cognitive offloading improved short-term memory performance, especially at higher memory loads. However, short-term memory ability and working memory capacity did not predict how often participants offloaded or how much they benefited from offloading.

Key findings

  • Offloading choice improved performance overall: a 2 (condition: choice vs. no-choice) × 5 (load: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10) ANOVA found a main effect of condition, \(F(1, 113) = 96.539, p < .001, \eta^2_G = 0.105\), a main effect of load, \(F(4, 452) = 676.178, p < .001, \eta^2_G = 0.549\), and a condition × load interaction, \(F(4, 452) = 42.478, p < .001, \eta^2_G = 0.085\), with the load effect less pronounced in the choice condition.
  • Offloading increased with memory load, and offloaded trials outperformed no-choice trials at set sizes 6, 8, and 10: \(t(100) = 6.278, p < .001, d = 0.729\); \(t(104) = 12.113, p < .001, d = 1.478\); and \(t(107) = 9.672, p < .001, d = 1.312\). At set size 2, no-choice performance was better than offloaded trials, \(t(38) = -2.647, p = .012, d = -0.535\); at set size 4, there was no difference, \(t(68) = 0.910, p = .366, d = 0.115\).
  • No-choice short-term memory performance was not correlated with offloading frequency, \(r(112) = -0.012, p = .897\). Adding WMC to a regression predicting offloading did not improve fit over no-choice performance alone, \(R^2 = 0.001\), \(F\) change \((1, 111) = 0.116, p = .735\).
  • For high-load benefit (choice minus no-choice at set sizes 6, 8, 10), the overall model was significant, \(R^2 = 0.148, F(2, 111) = 9.619, p < .001\); proportion of high-load trials offloaded predicted benefit, \(t(111) = 4.349, p < .001\), but WMC did not, \(t(111) = 0.821, p = .414\).

Methods

  • Final sample: 114 university undergraduates (130 collected; 16 excluded). Participants completed an auditory short-term memory task with set sizes 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 letters, in no-choice and choice blocks of 30 trials each, with block order counterbalanced. In the choice block, participants could use paper and pen to offload; recall was spoken and scored all-or-none for correct serial order.
  • WMC was measured after the memory task using automated operation span and symmetry span; a composite was created by z-scoring each task using Redick et al. (2012) norms and averaging them.
  • Analyses included a 2 × 5 within-subjects ANOVA, t tests at each set size comparing offloaded trials with no-choice performance, correlations, and regressions predicting offloading frequency and high-load offloading benefit. Power analysis targeted 113 participants to detect a correlation of .300 with 90% power at alpha .05. Inter-rater reliability for 24 participants was Cohen’s \(\kappa = .914, p < .001\).

Limitations

  • The paper states that it could not isolate the source of errors on offloaded trials, and that sample differences—such as a large proportion of English-fluent non-native speakers, course-credit-only compensation, auditory-only presentation, and lack of corrective feedback—may have contributed to lower overall performance and unexpected null results.
  • The paper notes that the null findings for short-term memory/WMC and offloading were contrary to predictions and to Risko and Dunn (2015), and that the results cannot answer for whom offloading is most beneficial.
  • Evident from the text: the sample was limited to undergraduates at two sites, limiting generalizability; the set-size 2 t test included only participants who offloaded at least once at that load, a small subset; and the ANOVA condition × load pattern was inspected visually rather than with formal contrasts.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s41235-019-0201-4

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

0 of 20 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    The proportion of trials offloaded increased as memory load increased.

    “the proportion of trials offloaded increased as memory load increased (Fig. 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Individuals with poorer memory abilities do not benefit more from offloading.

    “However, we fail to observe that those with poorer memory abilities have a greater propensity for offloading or benefit more from it.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    There was a significant main effect of memory load, with performance decreasing as load increased.

    “a significant main effect of memory load where performance decreased as load increased (F (4, 452) = 676.178, p < .001, η2G = 0.549)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Individuals with poorer memory abilities do not have a greater propensity for offloading.

    “However, we fail to observe that those with poorer memory abilities have a greater propensity for offloading or benefit more from it.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Inter-rater reliability between online and offline response coding for 24 participants was very good, κ = .914, p < .001.

    “Inter-rater reliability, as assessed by Cohen’s κ, was examined to assess the agreement between online and offline response coding for these 24 participants. There was very good agreement between online and offline response records, κ = .914, p < .001.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 5
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 23

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    There was a significant condition × load interaction, where the load effect was less pronounced in the choice condition.

    “We also found a significant condition × load interaction (F (4, 452) = 42.478, p < .001, η2G = 0.085) where the load effect was less pronounced in the choice condition (Fig. 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Ceiling-level performance was not obtained on offloaded trials; errors were observed on offloaded trials.

    “Given the opportunity to write information down, one might expect ceiling level performance at all memory loads. However, this effect was not obtained here, nor by Risko and Dunn (2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Risko and Dunn (2015) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The relationship between lower memory ability or ratings and higher offloading held true even when subjective confidence was not correlated with objective memory performance.

    “More interestingly, these patterns held true even when subjective confidence was not correlated with objective memory performance (Gilbert, 2015b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilbert, 2015b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Individuals who engage in offloading even when there is no objective performance benefit may be driven to do so by the incorrect belief that offloading will lead to better performance.

    “Recent work suggests that individuals who engage in offloading even when there is no objective performance benefit may be driven to do so by the incorrect belief that offloading will lead to better performance (Risko & Dunn, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Risko & Dunn, 2015 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Conditions (choice and no-choice) were blocked, and order was counterbalanced across subjects.

    “Conditions (choice and no-choice) were blocked, and order was counterbalanced across subjects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    Offloading can lead to impairments in performance when offloaded information is not available at the time the information is needed.

    “These prior findings suggest that offloading can lead to impairments in performance when offloaded information is not available at the time the information is needed, but that offloaded information, when available for use later, typically benefits performance.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Individuals sometimes choose to offload even when it does not improve performance, such as when performance is already at ceiling.

    “However, in some cases individuals choose to offload even when it does not improve performance (i.e., when performance is already at ceiling; Gilbert, 2015a, 2015b; Risko & Dunn, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilbert, 2015a, 2015b; Risko & Dunn, 2015

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    After exclusions, the final dataset consisted of 114 participants.

    “This resulted in a final dataset of 114 participants, all of whom were undergraduate students and received course credit for their participation.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Objects that were photographed were remembered more poorly later than objects simply visited and observed.

    “In a study where participants were asked to visit a museum and take photos of some artifacts and simply visit and observe other artifacts, those objects that were photographed were remembered more poorly later. This has been termed the photo-taking-impairment effect (Henkel, 2014).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Henkel, 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Participants indicating that they did not understand the choice manipulation were excluded.

    “any participant indicating that they did not understand the choice manipulation (i.e., thinking that they were not allowed to write in the choice condition or thinking that they were required to write in the choice condition) would be excluded.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Lower objective memory ability corresponds to higher levels of offloading behavior.

    “Perhaps unsurprisingly, lower objective memory ability and lower subjective memory ratings corresponded to higher levels of offloading behavior (Gilbert, 2015b).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilbert, 2015b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Lower subjective memory ratings correspond to higher levels of offloading behavior.

    “Perhaps unsurprisingly, lower objective memory ability and lower subjective memory ratings corresponded to higher levels of offloading behavior (Gilbert, 2015b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilbert, 2015b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The photo-taking-impairment effect was observed even when participants did not believe they would have access to photos later.

    “More recent work suggests that this effect may not be solely due to the belief that the camera will do the ‘remembering’ for them; recently, the photo-taking-impairment effect was observed even when participants did not believe they would have access to photos later (Soares & Storm, 2017).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Soares & Storm, 2017

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    Offloaded information, when available for use later, typically benefits performance.

    “These prior findings suggest that offloading can lead to impairments in performance when offloaded information is not available at the time the information is needed, but that offloaded information, when available for use later, typically benefits performance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The protocol proposed in the stage 1 submission of this registered report was executed as planned.

    “In the stage 1 submission of this registered report, we proposed the following protocol, which we executed as planned.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    One additional participant was added to maintain full counterbalance of the order of the two conditions, for a final sample size of 114.

    “In order to maintain a full counterbalance of the order of the two conditions (choice, no-choice), we added one additional participant to our sample for a final sample size of 114.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Short-term memory capacity, measured by performance in a no-choice condition, is inversely related to frequency of offloading in a choice condition.

    “They demonstrated that short-term memory capacity, measured by performance in a “no-choice condition” of their task where participants were not permitted to offload, was inversely related to the frequency of offloading in the choice condition during which participants were able to choose whether or not to offload information.”
    • Also stated in: § Individual differences in WMC and relation to other cognitive domains · plain
      “Risko and Dunn (2015) showed evidence for the former; those who performed better on a verbal short-term memory task were less likely to offload when given the opportunity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Risko and Dunn (2015) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    Exclusion criteria were determined prior to data collection.

    “The following exclusion criterion were determined prior to data collection.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Offloaded intentions are more likely to be fulfilled later compared to intentions that are not offloaded.

    “With respect to the question of the downstream effects of offloading, as one might suspect, offloaded intentions are more likely to be fulfilled later compared to intentions that are not offloaded (Gilbert, 2015a, 2015b), suggesting an overall benefit for offloaded versus internally stored representations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Gilbert, 2015a, 2015b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Participants performing below 50% accuracy on set size 2 in the short-term memory task were excluded.

    “Similarly, any subject performing below 50% accuracy on set size 2 in the short-term memory task would be excluded.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    The analysis plan proposed in the stage 1 submission of this registered report was executed as planned following data collection.

    “In the stage 1 submission of this registered report, we proposed the following analysis plan, which we executed as planned following data collection.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Participants obtaining less than 50% accuracy on the processing portion of either Operation Span or Symmetry Span were excluded.

    “Any participant obtaining less than 50% accuracy on the processing portion of either Operation Span or Symmetry Span would be excluded.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    An analysis designed to check for suppression in the planned regression did not find evidence of suppression.

    “Prior to conducting the regression we conducted an analysis designed to check for suppression in the planned regression and did not find evidence of suppression.3”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    To the extent that the patterns observed in the younger adult sample hold across the lifespan, performance of memory-based activities in healthy older adults and older adult populations with clinical memory impairment may benefit from offloading.

    “To the extent that the patterns observed in our younger adult population reported here hold across the lifespan, performance of memory-based activities in both healthy older adults and older adult populations with clinical memory impairment may stand to benefit from offloading.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The patterns observed in the younger adult sample hold across the lifespan.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Overall, the findings strengthen the idea that offloading does benefit performance and is particularly beneficial at higher memory loads.

    “Overall, our findings serve to strengthen the idea that offloading does benefit performance and is particularly beneficial at higher memory loads.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The pattern reported here is encouraging from the standpoint of prescribing the use of offloading as a strategy to rescue performance of memory-based activities in both healthy and cognitively compromised populations.

    “The pattern reported here is encouraging from the standpoint of prescribing the use of offloading as a strategy to rescue performance of memory-based activities in both healthy and cognitively compromised populations.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Performance on the no-choice block reflects internal memory ability.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Other memory improvement strategies, such as working memory training, tend to be more effective in individuals with higher objective memory ability to start with.

    “other memory improvement strategies, such as working memory training, tend to be more effective in individuals with higher objective memory ability to start with (Wiemers, Redick, & Morrison, 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Wiemers, Redick, & Morrison, 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

27 of 27

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Extant models of working memory and methods of testing WMC do not consider or test whether people offload information from working memory to external sources.

    “However, extant models of working memory and methods of testing WMC do not consider or test whether, when given the opportunity, people offload information from working memory to external sources.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The tasks used to measure WMC do not typically afford the opportunity to offload.

    “However, the tasks used to measure WMC do not typically afford the opportunity to offload, and just because individuals can store multiple items in working memory does not mean that they will when given an alternative (i.e., writing an item down).”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Less is known about why some individuals choose to engage in offloading and under what conditions they might choose to do so.

    “However, less is known about why some individuals choose to engage in offloading and under what conditions they might choose to do so.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Accuracy in the no-choice condition is a valid proxy for baseline memory ability.

    “We investigated the correlation between accuracy in the no-choice condition (as a proxy for baseline memory ability) with the likelihood of engaging in offloading in the choice condition.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The composite of operation span and symmetry span Z scores measures an underlying WMC construct.

    “This approach will allow for measurement of an underlying WMC construct, and will use complex span working memory measures that are common to the individual differences in WMC literature (Conway et al., 2005).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Memory loads of 6, 8, and 10 items are outside the capacity limits of short-term memory.

    “memory loads thought to be outside the capacity limits of short-term memory”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The patterns observed in the younger adult sample hold across the lifespan.

    “To the extent that the patterns observed in our younger adult population reported here hold across the lifespan”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Performance on the no-choice block reflects internal memory ability.

    “we correlated performance in the no-choice block with the frequency of offloading in the choice block. We predicted that better performance in the no-choice block would be inversely related to offloading frequency (i.e., better internal memory related to less offloading, poorer internal memory related to more offloading)”
8 of 8

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The impact of working memory capacity on offloading has been controversially discussed in previous research.

    “We chose to implement these tasks as the impact of working memory capacity on offloading has been controversially discussed in previous research (e.g., Morrison & Richmond, 2020; Risko & Dunn, 2015).”

    From Consequences of cognitive offloading: Boosting performance but diminishing memory (2021) · cites this paper as Morrison & Richmond, 2020

    The Introduction discusses competing predictions about whether people with greater memory capacity would offload less or would better identify when offloading is useful. The Discussion reports a failure to replicate an earlier short-term-memory finding, but says the relationship between working memory capacity specifically and offloading was tested for the first time in this study. Thus the paper supports uncertainty about memory capacity and offloading, but not a prior controversy specifically about working memory capacity. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Simply being exposed to misinformation can increase subsequent belief.

    “Reducing the sharing of misinformation is of substantial importance, because simply being exposed to misinformation can increase subsequent belief13,20–22.”

    From Accuracy prompts are a replicable and generalizable approach for reducing the spread of misinformation (2022) · cites this paper as [22]

Statistics recomputed

Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.

  • ConsistentF(1, 113) = 96.539reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F (1, 113) = 96.539, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(4, 452) = 676.178reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F (4, 452) = 676.178, p < .001”

  • ConsistentF(4, 452) = 42.478reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F (4, 452) = 42.478, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(38) = -2.647reported p = .012 · recomputed p = .012

    “t (38) = −2.647, p = .012”

  • Consistentt(68) = 0.91reported p = .366 · recomputed p = .366

    “t (68) = 0.910, p = .366”

  • Consistentt(100) = 6.278reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t (100) = 6.278, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(104) = 12.113reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t (104) = 12.113, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(107) = 9.672reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t (107) = 9.672, p < .001”

  • Consistentr(112) = -0.012reported p = .897 · recomputed p = .899

    “r (112) = −0.012, p = .897”

  • ConsistentF(1, 112) = 0.017reported p = .897 · recomputed p = .896

    “F (1, 112) = 0.017, p = .897”

  • ConsistentF(2, 111) = 0.066reported p = .936 · recomputed p = .936

    “F (2, 111) = 0.066, p = .936”

  • ConsistentF(2, 111) = 9.619reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “F (2, 111) = 9.619, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(111) = 4.349reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001

    “t (111) = 4.349, p < .001”

  • Consistentt(111) = 0.821reported p = .414 · recomputed p = .413

    “t (111) = 0.821, p = .414”

14 of 14

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Self-check results appear here once an independent check has confirmed them.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Arrington, C. M. (2017). When what you intend to do is not what you do: Task selection and task preparation in voluntary task switching. In Presented at the 58th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  2. Dunlosky, J., & Metcalfe, J. (2009). Older adulthood. In Metacognition, (pp. 264–292). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Morrison, A. B., & Richmond, L. L.
Affiliations
  • California State University, Sacramento (US)
  • Stony Brook University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Morrison, Alexandra B.
  • Richmond, Lauren L.
ORCID
Venue
Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-01-03
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
1-1
ISSN
2365-7464 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s41235-019-0201-4
PMC
PMC6942100
OpenAlex
W2997460947
Cited by
87
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 4
FWCI
10.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Cognitive Research Principles and Implications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
cognitive offloading, short-term memory, working memory capacity, individual differences, compensatory strategies, memory load, external memory aids, replication
MeSH terms
Adult, Humans, Individuality, Memory, Short-Term, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Psychomotor Performance, Mental Recall

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review