一致性、相关性对记忆生存优势效应的影响

对词语进行生存加工能提高记忆成绩,这种记忆的生存优势效应已得到不少研究的验证,且大多数研究表明生存优势是一种独特的编码方式(Nairne&Pandeirada,2011)。但是,Butler等人(2009)的研究结果表明实验中生存加工带来的记忆优势可能是一致性效应(即编码任务与编码的材料之间具有一致性)的作用。本文在2个实验中选用与生存和抢劫加工条件相关程度不同的词(高中低)为实验材料,采用生存加工、抢劫加工、愉悦度和有意学习为实验条件,研究一致性和相关性在记忆生存优势中的作用。结果发现:(1)生存条件下的记忆效果显著优于愉悦度条件和有意学习条件,这说明的确存在记忆的生存优势效应;(2)高生存相关词在生存加工条件下产生了记忆优势,而中、低生存相关词在2种加工条件下记忆成绩差异不显著,这说明加工条件的一致性只在一定程度上影响着记忆的生存优势效应;(3)词语自身的生存相关性没有表现出较强的记忆优势,当然这也可能与实验材料的词频有关。研究结果支持了Nairne和Pandeirada(2011)的观点。     

The mnemonic advantage of processing fitness-relevant information

Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) proposed that our memory systems serve an adaptive function and that they have evolved to help us remember fitness-relevant information. In a series of experiments, they demonstrated that processing words according to their survival relevance resulted in better retention than did rating them for pleasantness, personal relevance, or relevance to moving to a new house. The aim of the present study was to examine whether the advantage of survival processing could be replicated, using a control condition that was designed to match the survival processing task in arousal, novelty, and media exposure--the relevance to planning a bank heist. We found that survival processing nonetheless yielded better retention on both a recall (Experiment 1) and a recognition (Experiment 2) test. This mnemonic advantage of survival processing was also obtained when words were rated for their relevance to a character depicted in a video clip (Experiment 3). Our findings provide additional evidence that the mnemonic benefit of survival processing is a robust phenomenon, and they also support the utility of adopting a functional perspective in investigating memory.     

Adaptive Memory: Identifying the Proximate Roots of the Survival Processing Advantage

The current study examined the role of item-specific, relational, and elaborative processing on adaptive memory. Younger and older adults received the standard survival processing, a survival-short, or a pleasantness processing instruction. The survival-short condition was specifically included to lead to fewer possibilities to engage in elaborative processing. Furthermore, half of the presented words were categorized words to boost relational processing. Younger adults demonstrated the typical survival recall advantage in that standard survival processing instructions resulted in superior free recall performance than that of the survival-short and the pleasantness processing groups. Among older adults, no mnemonic benefit of standard survival processing relative to the survival-short or pleasantness processing groups was found. Furthermore, reducing the probability of elaborative processing (i.e., through the survival-short processing instructions) abolished the survival recall advantage. Our results thus provide further evidence for the role of item-specific, relational, and elaborative processing in the survival processing advantage.     

Adaptive memory: Stereotype activation is not enough

Studies have shown that survival processing leads to superior memorability. The aim of the present study was to examine whether this survival recall advantage might result from stereotype activation. To test this hypothesis, we conducted a pilot study and two experiments in which participants were primed with stereotypes (Experiment 1, professor and elderly person; Experiment 2, survival-stereotype). In Experiment 1, 120 undergraduates were randomly assigned to a survival, professor stereotype, elderly person stereotype, or moving scenario and rated words for their relevance to the imagined scenario. In Experiment 2, 75 undergraduates were given a survival, survival-stereotype (based on our pilot study), or moving scenario. Both experiments showed that survival processing leads to a greater recall advantage over the stereotype groups and control group. These data indicate that the mere activation of stereotypes cannot explain the survival recall advantage.     

记忆的生存加工优势效应

近年来,一些研究者使用生存加工范式来研究记忆,并发现了记忆的生存加工优势效应。本文首先介绍生存加工优势效应的含义及其研究范式,然后介绍生存优势产生的可能原因,即在长期的进化过程中,记忆的机制是为了解决人类祖先的适应性问题而设计的,因此产生记忆的生存优势效应。同时,还分析了记忆生存加工优势效应产生的其他可能原因以及对生存优势效应的争论。最后提出了今后需要进一步研究的问题。     

适应性记忆：方位记忆的生存优势

采用“间接学习—回忆”实验范式,考查方位记忆的生存优势及生存记忆的性别差异。在电脑屏幕上下左右4个方位随机呈现动物或食物图片,被试相对于中央点对捕获动物或采集食物的难易程度进行评价,然后进行方位回忆测验。实验1和实验2为2（情境：生存情境vs.比赛情境）×2（性别：男vs.女）的被试间设计,发现当狩猎动物或采集食物活动与生存相关时,图片方位回忆的正确率较大;实验3为2（情境：生存狩猎情境vs.生存采集情境）×2（性别：男vs.女）的混合设计,发现不同性别被试在两种生存情境中的图片回忆正确率存在差异。表明方位记忆具有生存优势,生存记忆存在性别差异。     

Does survival processing enhance implicit memory?

Recent research has shown that human memory may have evolved to remember information that has been processed for the purpose of survival, more so than information that has been processed for other purposes, such as home-moving. We investigated this survival-processing advantage using both explicit and implicit memory tests. In Experiment 1, participants rated words in one of three scenarios: survival, pleasantness, and moving, followed by a timed stem-cued recall/stem-cued completion task. Items were completed more quickly in the survival scenario, as compared with the other two for the explicit task, but no differences were found across conditions in the implicit task. In Experiment 2, the implicit task was changed to concreteness judgments to encourage more conceptual processing. Again, the survival-processing advantage occurred in the explicit task (speeded item recognition), but not in the implicit task. These results suggest that a survival-processing advantage may benefit participants’ memory performance only during explicit retrieval.     

Can the survival recall advantage be explained by basic memory processes?

Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) demonstrated a striking phenomenon: Words rated for relevance to a grasslands survival scenario were remembered better than identical words encoded under other deep processing conditions. Having replicated this effect using a novel set of words (Experiment 1), we contrasted the schematic processing and evolutionary accounts of the recall advantage (Experiment 2). Inconsistent with the schematic processing account, the grasslands survival scenario produced better recall than did a city survival scenario requiring comparable schematic processing. Recall in the grasslands scenario was unaffected by a self-reference manipulation. The findings are consistent with an evolutionary account that attributes the recall advantage to adaptive memory biases.     

Adaptive memory: the comparative value of survival processing

We recently proposed that human memory systems are "tuned" to remember information that is processed for survival, perhaps as a result of fitness advantages accrued in the ancestral past. This proposal was supported by experiments in which participants showed superior memory when words were rated for survival relevance, at least relative to when words received other forms of deep processing. The current experiments tested the mettle of survival memory by pitting survival processing against conditions that are universally accepted as producing excellent retention, including conditions in which participants rated words for imagery, pleasantness, and self-reference; participants also generated words, studied words with the intention of learning them, or rated words for relevance to a contextually rich (but non-survival-related) scenario. Survival processing yielded the best retention, which suggests that it may be one of the best encoding procedures yet discovered in the memory field.     

Does survival context enhance memory for source? A within-subjects comparison

ABSTRACT

Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada [2007. Adaptive memory: Survival processing enhances retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 263–273] demonstrated that processing words according to their relevance to a survival scenario enhanced their subsequent retrieval in recall and recognition tasks compared to a variety of control scenarios. From an adaptive perspective, it is maintained that processing words in a survival context should also enhance memory for source; however, evidence in the literature is rather mixed regarding a survival context advantage for source memory. In the current study, we conducted four experiments to systematically investigate the survival advantage in source memory, when the context itself is the source, with both recall (Experiments 1A and 1B) and recognition tests (Experiments 2A and 2B). Results showed a survival advantage for item memory over the control contexts in all experiments. The survival context advantage was not extended to source memory performance in Experiment 1A. Results from all other experiments, however, indicated a survival context advantage for both item and source memory. Findings are discussed in relation to possible proximate mechanisms underlying the survival processing effect.     

Adaptive memory: The survival scenario enhances item-specific processing relative to a moving scenario

Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) found that retention of words rated for their relevance to survival is superior to that of words encoded under numerous other deep processing conditions. They suggested that our memory systems might have evolved to confer an advantage for survival-relevant information. Burns, Burns, and Hwang (2011) suggested a two-process explanation of the proximate mechanisms responsible for the survival advantage. Whereas most control tasks encourage only one type of processing, the survival task encourages both item-specific and relational processing. They found that when control tasks encouraged both types of processing, the survival processing advantage was eliminated. However, none of their control conditions included non-survival scenarios (e.g., moving, vacation, etc.), so it is not clear how this two-process explanation would explain the survival advantage when scenarios are used as control conditions. The present experiments replicated the finding that the survival scenario improves recall relative to a moving scenario in both a between-lists and within-list design and also provided evidence that this difference was accompanied by an item-specific processing difference, not a difference in relational processing. The implications of these results for several existing accounts of the survival processing effect are discussed.     

Can survival processing enhance story memory? Testing the generalizability of the adaptive memory framework

Research from the adaptive memory framework shows that thinking about words in terms of their survival value in an incidental learning task enhances their free recall relative to other semantic encoding strategies and intentional learning (Nairne, Pandeirada, & Thompson, 2008). We found similar results. When participants used incidental survival encoding for a list of words (e.g., "Will this object enhance my survival if I were stranded in the grasslands of a foreign land?"), they produced better free recall on a surprise test than did participants who intentionally tried to remember those words (Experiment 1). We also found this survival processing advantage when the words were presented within the context of a survival or neutral story (Experiment 2). However, this advantage did not extent to memory for a story's factual content, regardless of whether the participants were tested by cued recall (Experiment 3) or free recall (Experiments 4-5). Listening to a story for understanding under intentional or incidental learning conditions was just as good as survival processing for remembering story content. The functionalist approach to thinking about memory as an evolutionary adaptation designed to solve reproductive fitness problems provides a different theoretical framework for research, but it is not yet clear if survival processing has general applicability or is effective only for processing discrete stimuli in terms of fitness-relevant scenarios from our past.     

Survival processing in times of stress

Recent studies have found that processing information according to an evolutionary relevant (i.e., survival) scenario improves its subsequent memorability, potentially as a result of fitness advantages gained in the ancestral past. So far, research has not revealed much about any proximate mechanisms that might underlie this so-called survival processing advantage in memory. Intriguingly, research has shown that the memorability of stressful situations is enhanced via the release of stress hormones acting on brain regions involved in memory. Since survival situations habitually involve some degree of stress, in the present study, we investigated whether stress serves as a proximate mechanism to promote survival processing. Participants rated words for their relevance to either a survival or a neutral (moving) scenario after they had been exposed to a psychosocial stressor or a no-stress control condition. Surprise retention tests immediately following the rating task revealed that survival processing and acute stress independently boosted memory performance. These results therefore suggest that stress does not serve as a proximate mechanism of the survival processing advantage in memory.     

Investigations of a reproductive processing advantage in memory

Previous work has shown that processing words for their survival value improves memory. If this survival processing effect reflects an evolutionary adaptation in memory, processing words for their reproductive value should also improve memory. Across three experiments, participants rated words for their relevance in reproductive scenarios. In Experiment 1, participants rated adjectives (traits) for their relevance in finding a mate, evaluating a coworker, or in terms of their pleasantness. Mate processing produced better memory than pleasantness ratings, but not coworker processing. In Experiment 2, participants rated traits for their relevance in detecting sexual or emotional infidelity. Neither processing condition produced better memory compared to pleasantness ratings, but there were several unpredicted interactions involving participant sex and jealousy responses. In Experiment 3, participants rated gifts for their appropriateness in a romantic date or a housewarming party, or in terms of their pleasantness. Date processing and housewarming processing both improved recall compared to pleasantness rating, but date processing and housewarming processing did not produce differences compared to each other. Overall, the current study demonstrates very little evidence of a reproductive processing effect, and nothing approaching the magnitude of previous work on the survival processing effect.     

感知觉加工与概念加工对联结记忆中图片优势效应的影响

本研究采用联结再认范式考察联结记忆中感知觉水平和概念加工程度对图片优势效应的影响。实验1通过呈现清晰或模糊的词语或图片对操纵了感知觉水平,结果发现只有在清晰条件下图片优势效应才会出现;实验2则在模糊条件下通过要求被试想象两个项目之间的关系操纵了概念加工程度,结果发现在有概念加工条件下,出现了图片优势效应。研究结果表明：（1）降低的感知觉水平会导致联结记忆中的图片优势效应消失;（2）对模糊项目对进行概念加工会使联结记忆中出现图片优势效应。     

A test of the survival processing advantage in implicit and explicit memory tests

The present study was designed to investigate the survival processing effect (Nairne, Thompson, & Pandeirada, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 263–273, 2007) in cued implicit and explicit memory tests. The survival effect has been well established in explicit free recall and recognition tests, but has not been evident in implicit memory tests or in cued explicit tests. In Experiment 1 of the present study, we tested implicit and explicit memory for words studied in survival, moving, or pleasantness contexts in stem completion tests. In Experiment 2, we further tested these effects in implicit and explicit category production tests. Across the two experiments, with four separate memory tasks that included a total of 525 subjects, no survival processing advantage was found, replicating the results from implicit tests reported by Tse and Altarriba (Memory & Cognition, 38, 1110–1121, 2010). Thus, although the survival effect appears to be quite robust in free recall and recognition tests, it has not been replicated in cued implicit and explicit memory tests. The similar results found for the implicit and explicit tests in the present study do not support encoding elaboration explanations of the survival processing effect.     

Altering retrieval demands reverses the picture superiority effect

In Experiment 1 subjects studied a mixed list of pictures and words and then received either a free recall test or a word fragment completion test (e.g.,_yr_mi_forpyramid) on which some fragments corresponded to previously studied items. Free recall of pictures was better than that of words. However, words produced greater priming than did pictures on the fragment completion test, although a small amount of picture priming did occur. Experiments 2 and 3 showed that the picture priming was not due to implicit naming of the pictures during study. In Experiment 4 subjects studied words and pictures and received either the word fragment completion test or a picture fragment identification test in which they had to name degraded pictures. Greater priming was obtained with words in word fragment completion, but greater priming was obtained with pictures on the picture identification test. We conclude that (1) the type of retrieval query determines whether pictures or words will exhibit superior retention, and (2)our results conform to the principle of transfer appropriate processing by which performance on transfer or retention tests benefits to the extent that the tests recapitulate operations used during learning.     

Does the thought of death contribute to the memory benefit of encoding with a survival scenario?

Four studies tested whether the thought of death contributes to the survival processing advantage found in memory tests (i.e., the survival effect). In the first study, we replicated the “Dying To Remember” (DTR) effect identified by Burns and colleagues whereby activation of death thoughts led to better retention than an aversive control situation. In Study 2, we compared an ancestral survival scenario, a modern survival scenario and a “life-after-death” scenario. The modern survival scenario and the dying scenario led to higher levels of recall than the ancestral scenario. In Study 3, we used a more salient death-thought scenario in which people imagine themselves on death row. Results showed that the “death-row” scenario yielded a level of recall similar to that of the ancestral survival condition. We also collected ratings of death-related thoughts (Studies 3 and 4) and of survival-related and planning thoughts (Study 4). The ratings indicated that death-related thoughts were induced more by the dying scenarios than by the survival scenarios, whereas the reverse was observed for both survival-related and planning thoughts. The findings are discussed in the light of two contrasting views of the influence of mortality salience in the survival effect.     

“In your head,zombie”: zombies,predation and memory

ABSTRACT

Imagining fictional creatures like zombies in survival situations boosts long-term memory for words encoded in these situations more than rating words for pleasantness (zombie effect). Study 1 required word-ratings in a zombie-survival scenario; participants were told they had to protect against either possible zombie attack or contamination. The zombie-survival situations yielded identical recall levels but higher recall rates than pleasantness. Study 2 matched a zombie-survival scenario on perceived fear with scenarios involving ghosts or predators. Perceived disgust in the zombie scenario was higher than in these other survival conditions. Words were remembered better when processed in survival scenarios than when rated for pleasantness, but there was no reliable difference in recall between the scenarios. In neither study did the number of death-related words produced in a word-fragment completion task fit the mortality salience account of the zombie memory effect. Overall findings suggest that this effect relates to the fear system.     

Adaptive memory: The survival-processing memory advantage is not due to negativity or mortality salience

Recent research has highlighted the adaptive function of memory by showing that imagining being stranded in the grasslands without any survival material and rating words according to their survival value in this situation leads to exceptionally good memory for these words. Studies examining the role of emotions in causing the survival-processing memory advantage have been inconclusive, but some studies have suggested that the effect might be due to negativity or mortality salience. In Experiments 1 and 2, we compared the survival scenario to a control scenario that implied imagining a hopeless situation (floating in outer space with dwindling oxygen supplies) in which only suicide can avoid the agony of choking to death. Although this scenario was perceived as being more negative than the survival scenario, the survival-processing memory advantage persisted. In Experiment 3, thinking about the relevance of words for survival led to better memory for these words than did thinking about the relevance of words for death. This survival advantage was found for concrete, but not for abstract, words. The latter finding is consistent with the assumption that the survival instructions encourage participants to think about many different potential uses of items to aid survival, which may be a particularly efficient form of elaborate encoding. Together, the results suggest that thinking about death is much less effective in promoting recall than is thinking about survival. Therefore, the survival-processing memory advantage cannot be satisfactorily explained by negativity or mortality salience.