The Effects of Enactment and Bizarreness on Associative Recognition

Studies of Psychology and Behavior ›› 2020, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (2): 145-152.

The Effects of Enactment and Bizarreness on Associative Recognition

ZHAO Minfang¹, FU Xiaolan^2,3, LI Kaiyun⁴, Hubert D. ZIMMER⁵

1. School of Education Science, Huizhou University, Huizhou 516007;
2. State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101;
3. Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049;
4. School of Education and Psychology, University of Jinan, Jinan 250022;
5. Department of Psychology, Saarland University, Saarbruecken 66123, Germany

Received:2019-09-12 Online:2020-06-08 Published:2020-03-20

动作操作与怪异性对联结记忆的影响

赵敏芳¹, 傅小兰^2,3, 李开云⁴, Hubert D. Zimmer⁵

1. 惠州学院教育科学学院，惠州 516007;
2. 中国科学院心理研究所，脑与认知科学国家重点实验室，北京 100101;
3. 中国科学院大学心理学系，北京 100049;
4. 济南大学教育与心理科学学院，济南 250022;
5. Department of Psychology，Saarland University，Saarbruecken 66123，Germany

通讯作者: 傅小兰
基金资助:
国家重点研发计划课题（2018AAA0100205）；国家自然科学青年科学基金项目（31700955、31800913）；广东省哲学社会科学“十三五”规划项目（GD17CXL03）；中国国家自然科学基金国际（地区）合作与交流项目（NSFC61621136008/DFG TRR-169）

Abstract

Abstract: Memory for actions is usually better after subject performed tasks (SPT) than verbal tasks (VT), which is known as the “SPT effect”. In the current study, we aimed to investigate whether the SPT effect in associative recognition was influenced by the strength of the pre-existing associations between an action and an object. During the study phase, participants studied ordinary and bizarre verb-object pairs (action phrases) in a SPT or VT condition. During testing, they discriminated between intact (old), recombined, and new items and made Remember/Know judgments. Results showed that associative recognition for ordinary verb-object pairs (but not bizarre verb-object pairs) was better following SPT than VT. Only in the VT condition (but not SPT), bizarre verb-object pairs were better recognized than ordinary verb-object pairs. These results demonstrate that enactment and bizarreness both could improve associative recognition of verb-object pairs, but these two factors together cannot produce an additive benefit to associative recognition.

Key words: SPT effect, enactment, bizarreness, memory for actions, associative memory

摘要： 被试操作任务（SPT）编码后的记忆成绩通常优于语词任务（VT）编码后的记忆成绩，此类现象被称为SPT效应。本研究考察动作与物体之间已有的联结程度对联结再认的SPT效应的影响。学习阶段，被试使用SPT与VT编码识记日常动作短语（动作与物体配对，如“切西瓜”）和怪异动作短语（如“种锤子”）；测试阶段，要求被试区分“旧”、“重组合”和“新”短语。结果发现，当识记日常动作短语时，SPT条件的联结再认成绩显著高于VT条件的成绩，但是，当识记怪异动作短语时，SPT条件与VT条件的联结再认成绩无显著差异。此外，仅在VT而非SPT条件，怪异动作短语的联结再认成绩显著高于日常动作短语的成绩。研究结果表明，动作操作和刺激材料的怪异性均可促进动作与物体的联结记忆，但是两者不能对联结记忆产生叠加的促进作用。

关键词: SPT效应, 动作操作, 怪异性, 动作记忆, 联结记忆

CLC Number:

B842.3

ZHAO Minfang, FU Xiaolan, LI Kaiyun, Hubert D. ZIMMER. The Effects of Enactment and Bizarreness on Associative Recognition[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2020, 18(2): 145-152.

赵敏芳, 傅小兰, 李开云, Hubert D. Zimmer. 动作操作与怪异性对联结记忆的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2020, 18(2): 145-152.

References

刘泽军, 王余娟, 郭春彦. (2019). 从整合的角度看联结记忆中的项目再认. 心理科学进展, 27(3), 490-498
王丽娟, 李广政. (2014). 动作记忆: 记忆研究的新范畴. 心理科学进展, 22(6), 953-958
郑志伟, 李娟, 肖凤秋. (2015). 熟悉性能够支持联结记忆: 一体化编码的作用. 心理科学进展, 23(2), 202-212
Cabeza, R. (2006). Prefrontal and medial temporal lobe contributions to relational memory in young and older adults. In H. D. Zimmer, A. Mecklinger，& U. Lindenberger (Eds.), Handbook of binding and memory: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience (pp. 315-338). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cohen, R. L. (1981). On the generality of some memory laws. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 22(1), 267-281, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9450.1981.tb00402.x.
Engelkamp, J. (1998). Memory for actions. Hove: Psychology Press.
Engelkamp, J., & Perrig, W. (1986). Differential effects of imaginal and motor encoding on the recall of action phrases. Archiv für Psychologie, 138(4), 261-272.
Engelkamp, J., Zimmer, H. D., & Biegelmann, U. E. (1993). Bizarreness effects in verbal tasks and subject-performed tasks. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 5(4), 393-415, doi: 10.1080/09541449308520127.
Hunt, R. R., & Einstein, G. O. (1981). Relational and item-specific information in memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20(5), 497-514, doi: 10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90138-9.
Knopf, M. (1991). Having shaved a kiwi fruit: Memory of unfamiliar subject-performed actions. Psychological Research, 53(3), 203-211, doi: 10.1007/BF00941388.
Knopf, M., & Neidhardt, E. (1989). Aging and memory for action events: The role of familiarity. Developmental Psychology, 25(5), 780-786, doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.25.5.780.
Kormi-Nouri, R. (1995). The nature of memory for action events: An episodic integration view. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 7(4), 337-363, doi: 10.1080/09541449508403103.
Kormi-Nouri, R., & Nilsson, L. G. (2001). The motor component is not crucial. In H. D. Zimmer, R. L. Cohen, M. J. Guynn, J. Engelkamp, R. Kormi Nouri, & M. A. Foley (Eds.), Memory for action. A distinct form of episodic memory? (pp. 97-111). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Mangels, J. A., & Heinberg, A. (2006). Improved episodic integration through enactment: Implications for aging. The Journal of General Psychology, 133(1), 37-65, doi: 10.3200/GENP.133.1.37-65.
McDaniel, M., & Bugg, J. M. (2008). Instability in memory phenomena: A common puzzle and a unifying explanation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15(2), 237-255, doi: 10.3758/PBR.15.2.237.
Mcdaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O., & Lollis, T. (1988). Qualitative and quantitative considerations in encoding difficulty effects. Memory and Cognition, 16(1), 8-14, doi: 10.3758/BF03197740.
Mohr, G., Engelkamp, J., & Zimmer, H. D. (1989). Recall and recognition of self-performed acts. Psychological Research, 51(4), 181-187, doi: 10.1007/BF00309146.
Nilsson, L. G. (2000). Remembering actions and words. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 137-148). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Rhodes, S. M., & Donaldson, D. I. (2007). Electrophysiological evidence for the influence of unitization on the processes engaged during episodic retrieval: Enhancing familiarity based remembering. Neuropsychologia, 45(2), 412-424, doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.06.022.
Richardson-Klavehn, A., Gardiner, J. M., & Java, R. I. (1996). Memory: Task dissociations, process dissociations and dissociations of consciousness. In G. D. M. Underwood (Ed.), Implicit cognition (pp. 85-158). New York, NY, US: Oxford University Press.
Roediger, H. L., & Zaromb, F. M. (2010). Memory for actions: How different? In L. Bäckman & L. Nyberg (Eds.), Memory, aging and the brain: A festschrift in honour of Lars-Göran Nilsson (pp. 24-52). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117(1), 34-50, doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.117.1.34.
Steffens, M. C., Jelenec, P., & Mecklenbräuker, S. (2009). Decomposing the memory processes contributing to enactment effects by multinomial modelling. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(1), 61-83, doi: 10.1080/09541440701868668.
Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 26(1), 1-12, doi: 10.1037/h0080017.
Worthen, J. B., & Wood, V. V. (2001). Memory discrimination for self-performed and imagined acts: Bizarreness effects in false recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 54(1), 49-67, doi: 10.1080/02724980042000020.
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research. Journal of Memory and Language, 46(3), 441-517, doi: 10.1006/jmla.2002.2864.
Yonelinas, A. P., & Jacoby, L. L. (1995). The relation between remembering and knowing as bases for recognition: Effects of size congruency. Journal of Memory and Language, 34(5), 622-643, doi: 10.1006/jmla.1995.1028.
Zhao, M. F., Zimmer, H. D., Zhou, X. Y., & Fu, X. L. (2016). Enactment supports unitisation of action components and enhances the contribution of familiarity to associative recognition. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 28(8), 932-947, doi: 10.1080/20445911.2016.1229321.
Zimmer, H. D. (2001). Why do actions speak louder than words? Action memory as a variant of encoding manipulations or the result of a specific memory system? In H. D. Zimmer, R. L. Cohen, M. J. Guynn, J. Engelkamp, R. Kormi Nouri, & M. A. Foley (Eds.), Memory for action: A distinct form of episodic memory? (pp. 151-198). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Zimmer, H. D., & Cohen, R. L. (2001). Remembering actions: A specific type of memory? In H. D. Zimmer, R. L. Cohen, M. J. Guynn, J. Engelkamp, R. Kormi Nouri, & M. A. Foley (Eds.), Memory for action: A distinct form of episodic memory? (pp. 3-24). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Zimmer, H. D., Helstrup, T., & Nilsson, L. G. (2007). Action events in everyday life and their remembering. In S. Magnussen & T. Helstrup (Eds.), Everyday memory (pp. 57-92). London: Psychology Press.

[1]	ZHAO Haoyuan, AN Shu, REN Xiaoyun, MAO Weibin. The Effects of Emotionality and Background Presentation on Item-background Associative Memory [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(2): 193-201.
[2]	Guo Xiuyan, Tang Jinghua, Li Jingguang. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GRAPHIC AND PHONOLOGICAL ENCODING IN FALSE MEMORY OF CHINESE CHARACTERS [J]. , 2007, 5(2): 86-92.