The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
whether or not that you looked at a photo that you took, or whether or not you deleted it and never looked at it again, didn't just enhance visual memory or the memory from the visual components of that image but it always reduced your ability to remember sounds associated with that experience.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
But rather, taking mental snapshots of things that you see. Again, emphasizing that will create a better memory of what you see when you take that mental snapshot, but will actually reduce your memory for the things that you hear at that moment.
And you can leverage this information. And this involves both the taking of photographs, something that's actually quite easily done these days with your phone as well as your ability to take mental photographs by literally snapping your eyelids shut.