A reference is a doorway into a claim. See what each source contributes, where it is used and what remains to be examined.
Nine preliminary source records · Specialist review pending
Read the status, not just the title.
This is a targeted starting collection, not a systematic literature search. An inspected abstract, a main article and a fully appraised study are different levels of preparation. Inclusion does not imply endorsement by the authors or their institutions.
S1 / van Ede & Nobre · 2023 · Annual Review of Psychology 74, 137–165 · Review
Turning Attention Inside Out: How Working Memory Serves Behavior
Attention and selection within working memory.
What has been checked?
Publisher metadata and abstract rechecked on 30 September 2026. Chitta uses the abstract only for the review’s scope of selective attention within working memory. Full-text appraisal and appraisal of its cited studies remain incomplete.
Shared mechanisms underlie the control of working memory and attention
Selection tasks in trained rhesus monkeys.
What has been checked?
Author manuscript main text, task description and control-representation sections inspected on 30 September 2026 via PMC. Two trained monkeys performed the tasks. Supplements, code and underlying recordings have not been audited; the finding is not direct evidence about everyday human awareness.
Attention and consciousness: two distinct brain processes
An attributed position on attention and consciousness.
What has been checked?
PubMed abstract rechecked on 30 September 2026. Used only to attribute the authors’ 2007 argument, not to settle its validity or summarize the contemporary field. Full text and the linked scholarly exchange have not been appraised.
Repeated study and retrieval in vocabulary learning.
What has been checked?
Author-hosted main article inspected again on 29 September 2026, including condition definitions and one-week assessment. Supplementary methods have not been audited.
S5 / Vaccaro, Almaatouq & Malone · 2024 · Nature Human Behaviour 8, 2293–2303 · Systematic review and meta-analysis
When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Comparing joint performance with standalone baselines.
What has been checked?
Publisher version of record checked on 30 September 2026 for the comparison definitions, main pooled results, eligibility period and stated limitations. These specific claims agree with author manuscript v2; complete textual equivalence is not claimed. The main article reports potential publication bias for human augmentation. Supplements, code and underlying data have not been independently audited.
S6 / Bastani et al. · 2025 · PNAS · Field experiment
Generative AI without guardrails can harm learning: Evidence from high school mathematics
Assisted practice and later unaided mathematics performance.
What has been checked?
Main-article abstract, design and stated main results rechecked on 30 September 2026. The August 2025 correction was read: it corrects Osbert Bastani’s institutional affiliation and does not report a change to the findings. Supplementary analyses and data remain unaudited.
AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: an RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting
A structured physics tutor compared with active classroom learning.
What has been checked?
Publisher main article retrieved on 29 September 2026. Results, methods, assignment and limitations inspected. Supplements and data have not been independently audited; this is not specialist approval.
Working Memory and Attention — A Conceptual Analysis and Review
What has been checked?
Main text available via PMC. Opening definitions and attention-as-selection sections rechecked on 30 September 2026. The limited-resource/selection distinction supports Chitta’s conceptual framing; the cited experiments have not been independently audited.
Retrieval Practice Consistently Benefits Student Learning: a Systematic Review of Applied Research in Schools and Classrooms
What has been checked?
Author-hosted full text available. Abstract, inclusion scope and rationale for individual comparisons inspected on 29 September 2026. Not every included study has been appraised.
If a citation seems mismatched, note the page, the sentence and a source that explains the issue. You can email Chitta; this preview does not promise a review deadline or operate a submission database.