Advertisement · 728 × 90
#
Hashtag
#ESCoP25
Advertisement · 728 × 90
A group of approximately 20 female researchers standing together on a staircase at a conference venue.

A group of approximately 20 female researchers standing together on a staircase at a conference venue.

👩‍🔬 #InternationalDayOfWomenAndGirlsInScience – Slightly late to the party, but still a perfect time for a shout-out to the wonderful Women in #WorkingMemory (WomWom) community — a network of brilliant, generous, & supportive researchers who continue to inspire me.

A few of us at #ESCOP25 last year 👇

21 4 0 0

It was an absolute pleasure and so much fun to teach this course at #ESCoP25! Huge thanks to my co-organizers, all the participants, and the ESCoP team for making it such a fantastic experience!

12 2 0 0

What can we learn about working memory by studying eye movements?

We followed this question during an thought inspiring symposium at #ESCoP25 with great talks by Shlomit Yuval-Greenberg, @ruhibhanap.bsky.social, @joaovieiraadv.bsky.social, @genevievelawson.bsky.social, @candicemorey.bsky.social

6 2 0 0
Post image

Had a great time at #escop25 in Sheffield! Thank you for organising the symposium on multisensory working memory @lauraklatt.bsky.social

0 0 0 0

Our symposium on applying diffusion models is about to start at #escop25 in LT5. Looking forward to the discussions!

3 0 0 0

Heading into Sheffield for #ESCOP25

I'm taking part in a symposium on using drift diffusion models for between group comparisons,organised by @ambercopeland.bsky.social

W/ @cmanning.bsky.social
Craig Hedge and Alekhya Mandali also speaking.

Lot to discuss,should be a great session!

4 2 0 0

🔎 T&Cs apply: To claim your chocolate, you’ll need to chat with me about the actual science behind the (almost errorless) poster. #ESCOP25

2 0 0 0

👀 Spot the typo challenge! My poster at Board 19 has a not-so hidden typo. First person to find it when you swing by gets some chocolate! #ESCOP25 #Misspelling #WHY #Fail

2 0 1 0
This poster presents work that examines how spatiotemporal boundaries influence recall. Previous research suggests that such boundaries improve memory (Logie & Donaldson, 2021). It remains unclear, however, whether the benefit comes directly from the boundaries or from the post-encoding processes they permit, such as elaborative rehearsal. Across three experiments, participants studied words in a virtual environment under different conditions: (1) Non-segmented: continuous word presentation in a single room; (2) Segmented: a new room introduced every four words, creating spatiotemporal boundaries; (3) Non-segmented (time): continuous word presentation in one room, with structured pauses to match the timing of the segmented condition. In Experiment 3, the segmented condition was replaced by a non-segmented (task) condition, which used the same timing as the non-segmented (time) condition but filled the pauses with a 2-back task to prevent rehearsal. Findings were as follows: Experiments 1 and 2 showed better recall in the segmented and non-segmented (time) conditions compared to the non-segmented condition, with no difference between segmented and non-segmented (time). Experiment 3 found reduced recall when a task replaced the free period. However, it did not replicate the earlier benefit of non-segmented (time) over non-segmented. Overall, the results suggest that recall advantages observed in earlier work may be due to post-encoding processes rather than the boundaries themselves. The next experiment will test whether elaborative rehearsal or resource allocation during encoding better explains these effects by systematically varying the presence of free periods and tasks.

This poster presents work that examines how spatiotemporal boundaries influence recall. Previous research suggests that such boundaries improve memory (Logie & Donaldson, 2021). It remains unclear, however, whether the benefit comes directly from the boundaries or from the post-encoding processes they permit, such as elaborative rehearsal. Across three experiments, participants studied words in a virtual environment under different conditions: (1) Non-segmented: continuous word presentation in a single room; (2) Segmented: a new room introduced every four words, creating spatiotemporal boundaries; (3) Non-segmented (time): continuous word presentation in one room, with structured pauses to match the timing of the segmented condition. In Experiment 3, the segmented condition was replaced by a non-segmented (task) condition, which used the same timing as the non-segmented (time) condition but filled the pauses with a 2-back task to prevent rehearsal. Findings were as follows: Experiments 1 and 2 showed better recall in the segmented and non-segmented (time) conditions compared to the non-segmented condition, with no difference between segmented and non-segmented (time). Experiment 3 found reduced recall when a task replaced the free period. However, it did not replicate the earlier benefit of non-segmented (time) over non-segmented. Overall, the results suggest that recall advantages observed in earlier work may be due to post-encoding processes rather than the boundaries themselves. The next experiment will test whether elaborative rehearsal or resource allocation during encoding better explains these effects by systematically varying the presence of free periods and tasks.

🚪🧠 Ever wondered if walking through doors really changes your memory? At #ESCOP25 today I’m at Board 19 showing how spatiotemporal boundaries impact recall in VR. Although time matters, it’s more to do with using it effectively!

11 2 1 1

Looking forward to today‘s symposium “working memory beyond the item” at #ESCOP25 !

4 0 0 0