The ineluctable modality of the audible: perceptual determinants of auditory verbal short-term memory

Classical cognitive accounts of verbal short-term memory (STM) invoke an abstract, phonological level of representation which, although it may be derived differently via different modalities, is itself amodal. Key evidence for this view is that serial recall of phonologically similar verbal items (e.g., the letter sounds b, c, g, and d) is worse than that of dissimilar items, regardless of modality of presentation. Here we show that the effect of such phonological similarity in STM can be fully accounted for by the joint action of articulatory similarity, leading to errors in speech planning processes, and acoustic similarity within auditorily presented lists, which modulates their perceptual organization. The results indicate that key evidence used to argue for the existence of abstract phonological representation can in fact be fully accounted for by reference to modality-specific perceptual and motor planning mechanisms.     

Modalities of memory: Is reading lips like hearing voices?

Functional similarities in verbal memory performance across presentation modalities (written, heard, lipread) are often taken to point to a common underlying representational form upon which the modalities converge. We show here instead that the pattern of performance depends critically on presentation modality and different mechanisms give rise to superficially similar effects across modalities. Lipread recency is underpinned by different mechanisms to auditory recency, and while the effect of an auditory suffix on an auditory list is due to the perceptual grouping of the suffix with the list, the corresponding effect with lipread speech is due to misidentification of the lexical content of the lipread suffix. Further, while a lipread suffix does not disrupt auditory recency, an auditory suffix does disrupt recency for lipread lists. However, this effect is due to attentional capture ensuing from the presentation of an unexpected auditory event, and is evident both with verbal and nonverbal auditory suffixes. These findings add to a growing body of evidence that short-term verbal memory performance is determined by modality-specific perceptual and motor processes, rather than by the storage and manipulation of phonological representations.     

Differential dependence of Pavlovian incentive motivation and instrumental incentive learning processes on dopamine signaling

Here we attempted to clarify the role of dopamine signaling in reward seeking. In Experiment 1, we assessed the effects of the dopamine D(1)/D(2) receptor antagonist flupenthixol (0.5 mg/kg i.p.) on Pavlovian incentive motivation and found that flupenthixol blocked the ability of a conditioned stimulus to enhance both goal approach and instrumental performance (Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer). In Experiment 2 we assessed the effects of flupenthixol on reward palatability during post-training noncontingent re-exposure to the sucrose reward in either a control 3-h or novel 23-h food-deprived state. Flupenthixol, although effective in blocking the Pavlovian goal approach, was without effect on palatability or the increase in reward palatability induced by the upshift in motivational state. This noncontingent re-exposure provided an opportunity for instrumental incentive learning, the process by which rats encode the value of a reward for use in updating reward-seeking actions. Flupenthixol administered prior to the instrumental incentive learning opportunity did not affect the increase in subsequent off-drug reward-seeking actions induced by that experience. These data suggest that although dopamine signaling is necessary for Pavlovian incentive motivation, it is not necessary for changes in reward experience, or for the instrumental incentive learning process that translates this experience into the incentive value used to drive reward-seeking actions, and provide further evidence that Pavlovian and instrumental incentive learning processes are dissociable.