Visuospatial cues for reinstating mental models in working memory during interrupted reading.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reading involves constructing a mental representation in long-term working memory of the world described by the text. Disrupting short-term working memory can interfere with the maintenance of mental models (sets of retrieval cues) needed to access these representations, producing detrimental effects on reading time. In two experiments, subjects read passages that included pairs of coreferential sentences interrupted by unrelated text. As in previous research, reading times increased for the first sentence after the interruption, likely reflecting a reinstatement process for mental models in working memory. In the present research, pictures were provided as visuospatial cues to aid the reinstatement process. The interruption effect was found to be smaller with pictures related to the passages than with unrelated pictures (Experiment 1) or titles (Experiment 2); however, both of these effects occurred only for slow readers. The authors hypothesize that slow readers take the time needed to integrate visuospatial information into their mental models, providing more resilient access to long-term working memory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it