Slow oscillation and spindle stimulation did not differentially affect declarative memory change compared to control conditions.¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2026 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The Time × Condition interaction for Grid Location Task accuracy was not significant (F(4, 97) = 0.11, p = 0.979), indicating stimulation conditions did not differentially affect declarative memory change. → Jourde 2026

Evidence¶

Jourde 2026¶

Jourde, H.R., Sita, K.Z., Eyqvelle, Z., Brooks, M., & Coffey, E.B.J. (2026). Modulating sleep: slow oscillation and spindle stimulation effects on physiology and memory. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00383-6

q3 · i? · causal · r2

A repeated measures ANOVA on the Grid Location Task in the nap study found a significant main effect of Time but no Time × Condition interaction ("F(4, 97) = 0.11, p = 0.979"), meaning no stimulation condition differentially changed declarative memory performance.

"the interaction between Time and Condition was not significant, F(4, 97) = 0.11, p = 0.979,𝜔2 = 0.00, indicating that while performance generally decreased during the interval between pre- and post-testing, the experimental conditions did not differentially affectthechangeinperformanceonthedeclarativememorytask (GLT) over time"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Long-Term Memory — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Slow oscillation and spindle stimulation did not differentially affect motor sequence learning improvement compared to control conditions. — related
• Piano rhythm accuracy improved across all conditions regardless of stimulation condition, while piano pitch accuracy did not change significantly. — related