With inter-object intervals held comparable, memory accuracy is significantly higher for the within-Mission/across-Spatial level than for the across-Mission/within-Spatial level¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? A planned comparison of the two conditions with similar inter-object intervals showed significantly higher accuracy when the mission boundary was not crossed (estimate = 0.28, Z = 2.7, p = 0.007). → Yue Li 2025

Evidence¶

Yue Li 2025¶

Yue Li, Mikael Johansson & Andrey R. Nikolaev. (2025). Hierarchical event segmentation of episodic memory in virtual reality. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00321-6

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Planned comparison controlling for inter-object intervals: the levels with the shortest and longest intervals were excluded, and the reduced GLMM "showed significantly higher accuracy in the within-Mission/across-Spatial" condition, ruling out temporal-gap explanations.

"The reduced model, including only levels with comparable inter-object intervals ( within-Mission/across-Spatial level and across-Mission/within-Spatial level), showed significantly higher accuracy in the within-Mission/across-Spatial than in the across-Mission/within-Spatial level (estimate = 0.28, Std.Error = 0.1, Z-value = 2.7, p = 0.007)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Confidence in correct memory responses is higher when both spatial and mission boundaries are not crossed, with an interaction between the two boundary types — related
• Crossing a spatial boundary shows no significant effect on temporal order memory accuracy, and no significant mission-by-spatial interaction, in the VR salesperson task — related
• Crossing a conceptual (mission) boundary significantly impairs the accuracy of temporal order memory in an interactive VR episodic memory task — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)