MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978311873

Offloading memory: serial position effects.

2019· article· en· W2978311873 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Functions and Memory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotivated forgettingForgettingRecallSerial position effectCognitionPsychologyCognitive psychologyComputer scienceFree recallNeuroscience
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the long history and pervasiveness of cognitive offloading as a memory strategy, the memorial fate of offloaded in-formation is not well understood. Recent work has suggested that offloading information may engage similar mechanismsas instructions to forget (directed forgetting). Presently, we test this prediction by examining the serial position effectfor offloaded information. Previous research has demonstrated that forget instructions can eliminate the primacy effectwhile leaving an intact recency effect. Across two experiments, participants completed multiple free recall trials using anexternal aid and then a final recall trial without the external aid. We compared a group that was expecting to use the aid forthe final trial (offloading) with a group that was not (no offloading). We found a memory impairment for offloaded itemsthat was characterized by a reduced primacy effect but intact recency effect, similar to what has been reported in researchon directed forgetting.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.061

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it