Top

Gepubliceerd in:

27-12-2022 | Original Article

Experience of memory: transfer of the motor feeling of fluency linked to our interaction with the environment

Auteurs: D. Brouillet, S. Rousset, D. Perrin

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 6/2023

Abstract

In the field of memory, it is now admitted that an experience of memory is not only the consequence of the activation of a precise content, but also results from an inference associated with the transfer of the manner in which the process was carried out (i.e., fluency) in addition to the transfer of the process itself. The aim of this work was to show that experience of memory is also associated with the fluency that is due to the transfer of a processing carried out in our past interactions with our environment, independently the fluency associated with the stimulus in progress. First, participants performed a perceptual discrimination task (geometric shapes: circle or square) that involves a fluent or a non-fluent gesture to respond. Motor fluency vs. non-fluency was implicitly associated with the colour of the geometric shapes. Second, participants had to perform a classical memory recognition task. During the recognition phase, items appeared either with the colour associated with motor fluency or with the colour associated with motor non-fluency. We used a Go–NoGo task to avoid having a confused factor (response space). Results show that items were better recognised with a colour associated with motor fluency than with a colour associated with non-motor fluency. These findings support the idea that an experience of memory is also associated with the transfer of the motor feeling of fluency linked to our past interactions with the environment.

vorige artikel Empowering episodic memory through a model-based egocentric navigational training

volgende artikel Differences of resource allocation to active and passive states in visual working memory

Actually, fluency during recognition can be due to two distinct mechanisms. Either it is due to the fact that the stimulus has been encountered in the past, which facilitates its current processing. In this case, there is no transfer of fluency, i.e., even if the processing was not fluent in the past, the fact that it occurred suffices to produce the current fluency. Or it is due to the transfer into the current recognition task of a fluency that occurred in the past. In this paper, we are interested in the second case.

The effect of manual dominance is also well documented in the area of emotions (Brouillet et al., 2015; Casasanto, 2009; Casasanto & Chrysikou, 2011; Casasanto & Henetz, 2012; Casasanto & Jasmin, 2010; de la Fuente et al., 2014; de la Vega et al., 2012, 2013; Kong, 2013; Mihau et al, 2013, 2015; Toplolinski, 2012; Topolinski & Strack, 2009; Woltin & Guinote, 2015).

Regarding embodied approaches of language, a growing number of researches have highlighted that when we read a word, brain simulates the same sensorimotor systems that are involved when interacting with real objects represented by the word. Thus, a large overlap between the brain areas involved in language and action is regularly observed (see Harpaintner et al., 2020; Henningsen-Schomers & Pulvermüller, 2021; Pulvermüller, 2005, 2010, 2013).

Bowen, H. J., Kark, S. M., & Kensinger, E. A. (2018). NEVER forget: negative emotional valence enhances recapitulation. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 25(3), 870–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1313-9CrossRefPubMed

Bramão, I., & Johansson, M. (2018). Neural pattern classification tracks transfer-appropriate processing in episodic memory. Eneuro. https://doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0251-18.2018CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bransford, J. D., Stein, B. S., Vye, N. J., Franks, J. J., Auble, P. M., Mezynski, K. J., & Perfetto, G. A. (1982). Differences in approaches to learning: An overview. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 111(4), 390. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.111.4.390CrossRef

Breneiser, J. E., & Mcdaniel, M. A. (2006). Discrepancy processes in prospective memory retrieval. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13(5), 837–841. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194006CrossRefPubMed

Brouillet, D., Brouillet, T., & Versace, R. (2022). Motor fluency makes it possible to integrate the components of the trace in memory and facilitates its re-construction. Memory and Cognition. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-022-01350-xCrossRefPubMed

Brouillet, D., Milhau, A., & Brouillet, T. (2015). When ‘“good”’ is not always right: effect of the consequences of motor action on valence-space associations. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 237. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00237CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Brouillet, D., Milhau, A., Brouillet, T., & Servajean, P. (2017). Effect of an unrelated fluent action on word recognition: A case of motor discrepancy. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 24(3), 894–900. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1160-0CrossRefPubMed

Brouillet, T., Michalland, A. H., Martin, S., & Brouillet, D. (2021). When the action to be performed at the stage of retrieval enacts memory of action verbs. Experimental Psychology, 68(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000507CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. University of California Press.CrossRef

Casasanto, D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts: good and bad in right- and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 138(3), 351–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015854CrossRefPubMed

Casasanto, D., & Chrysikou, E. G. (2011). When left is ‘right’: Motor fluency shapes abstract concepts. Psychological Science, 22(4), 419–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611401755CrossRefPubMed

Casasanto, D., & Henetz, T. (2012). Handedness shapes children’s abstract concepts. Cognitive Science, 36, 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01199.xCrossRefPubMed

Casasanto, D., & Jasmin, K. (2010). Good and bad in the hands of politicians; Spontaneous gestures during positive and negative speech. PLoS ONE, 5(7), e11805. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011805CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Chen, M., & Lin, C. H. (2021). What is in your hand influences your purchase intention: Effect of motor fluency on motor simulation. Current Psychology, 40, 3226–3234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00261-6CrossRef

de la Fuente, J., Casasanto, D., & RomanSantiago, A. J. (2014). Can culture influence body-specific associations between space and valence? Cognitive Science, 39, 821–832. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12177CrossRefPubMed

de la Vega, I., de Filippis, M., Lachmair, M., Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2012). Emotional valence and physical space: Limits of interaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38(2), 375–385. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024979CrossRefPubMed

de la Vega, I., Dudschig, C., De Filippis, M., Lachmair, M., & Kaup, B. (2013). Keep your hands crossed: The valence-by-left/right interaction is related to hand, not side, in an incongruent hand response key assignment. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 273–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.12.011CrossRefPubMed

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146CrossRefPubMed

Fisk JD, Goodale MA (1985) The organization of eye and limb movements during unrestricted reaching to targets in contralateral and ipsilateral visual space. Experimental Brain Research, 60(1):159–178.

Franks, J. J., Bilbrey, C. W., Lien, K. G., & McNamara, T. P. (2000). Transfer-appropriate processing (TAP). Memory and Cognition, 28(7), 1140–1151. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211815CrossRefPubMed

Goldinger, S. D., & Hansen, W. A. (2005). Remembering by the seat of your pants. Psychological Science, 16(7), 525–529. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01569.xCrossRefPubMed

Hansen, J., Dechene, A., & Wänke, M. (2008). Discrepant fluency increases subjective truth. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(3), 687–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2007.04.005CrossRef

Hansen, J., & Wänke, M. (2008). It’s the difference that counts: Expectancy/experience discrepancy moderates the use of ease of retrieval in attitude judgments. Social Cognition, 26(4), 447–468. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.4.447CrossRef

Harpaintner, M., Sim, E. J., Trumpp, N. M., Ulrich, M., & Kiefer, M. (2020). The grounding of abstract concepts in the motor and visual system: An fMRI study. Cortex, 124, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2019.10.014CrossRefPubMed

Henningsen-Schomers, M. R., & Pulvermüller, F. (2021). Modelling concrete and abstract concepts using brain-constrained deep neural networks. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01591-6CrossRef

Hutchinson, J. B., & Barrett, L. F. (2019). The power of predictions: An emerging paradigm for psychological research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(3), 280–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419831992CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 110(3), 306. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.110.3.306CrossRefPubMed

Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., & Dywan, J. (1989). Memory attributions. In H. L. Roediger & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Varieties of memory and consciousness: Essays in honour of Endel Tulving (pp. 391–422). Springer. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315801841CrossRef

Jacoby, L. L., & Whitehouse, K. (1989). An illusion of memory: False recognition influenced by unconscious perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology : General, 118(2), 126–135. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.118.2.126CrossRef

Kelley, C. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (1990). The construction of subjective experience: Memory attributions. Mind and Language, 5(1), 49–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.1990.tb00152.xCrossRef

Kelley, C. M., & Jacoby, L. L. (1998). Subjective reports and process dissociation: Fluency, knowing, and feeling. Acta Psychologica, 98(2–3), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00039-5CrossRef

Kolers, P. A. (1975). Specificity of operations in sentence recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 7(3), 289–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90013-4CrossRef

Kolers, P. A., & Roediger, H. L., III. (1984). Procedures of mind. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23(4), 425–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(84)90282-2CrossRef

Kolers, R. A. (1976). Reading a year later. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 2, 554–565. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.2.5.554CrossRef

Kong, F. (2013). Space-valence associations depend on handedness: evidence from a bimanual output task. Psychological Research Psychologische Forschung, 77(6), 773–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-012-0471-7CrossRefPubMed

Kronlund, A., & Whittlesea, B. W. (2006). Remembering after a perception of discrepancy: Out with the old, in with the two. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1174. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1174CrossRefPubMed

Lanska, M., & Westerman, D. (2018). Transfer appropriate fluency: Encoding and retrieval interactions in fluency-based memory illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 44(7), 1001. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000496CrossRefPubMed

Mandler, G. (1980). Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. Psychological Review, 87(3), 252. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.252CrossRef

Mandler, G. (1981). The recognition of previous encounters: The highly diverse aspects of recognition memory are now thought to depend on complex interacting processes involving both familiarity and retrievability. American Scientist, 69(2), 211–218.PubMed

Mather, M., & Sutherland, M. (2009). Disentangling the effects of arousal and valence on memory for intrinsic details. Emotion Review, 1(2), 118–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/1754073908100435CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experiment builder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7CrossRefPubMed

McDaniel, M. A. (2013). Discrepancy-plus-search processes in prospective memory retrieval. Memory and Cognition, 41(3), 443–451. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-012-0273-6CrossRefPubMed

Milhau, A., Brouillet, T., & Brouillet, D. (2013). Biases in evaluation of neutral words due to motor compatibility effect. Acta Psychologica, 144(2), 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2013.06.008CrossRefPubMed

Milhau, A., Brouillet, T., & Brouillet, D. (2015). Valence-space compatibility effects depend on situated motor fluency in both right- and left-handers. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(5), 887–899. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.967256CrossRef

Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16(5), 519–533. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80016-9CrossRef

Perrin, D., & Michaelian, K. (2017). Memory as mental time travel. In S. Bernecker & K. Michaelian (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of philosophy of memory (pp. 228–239). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687315CrossRef

Perrin, D., & Rousset, S. (2014). The episodicity of memory. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 5(3), 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-014-0196-1CrossRef

Pulvermüller, F. (2005). Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(7), 576–582. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1706CrossRefPubMed

Pulvermüller, F. (2010). Brain embodiment of syntax and grammar: Discrete combinatorial mechanisms spelt out in neuronal circuits. Brain and Language, 112(3), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2009.08.002CrossRefPubMed

Pulvermüller, F. (2013). Semantic embodiment, disembodiment or misembodiment? In search of meaning in modules and neuron circuits. Brain and Language, 127(1), 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2013.05.015CrossRefPubMed

Roediger, H. L., Gallo, D. A., & Geraci, L. (2002). Processing approaches to cognition: The impetus from the levels-of-processing framework. Memory, 10(5–6), 319–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210224000144CrossRefPubMed

Schendan, H., & Kutas, M. (2007). Neurophysiological evidence for the time course of activation of global shape, part, and local contour representations during visual object categorization and memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 734–749. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2007.19.5.734CrossRefPubMed

Servajean, P. (2018). Approche “système unique » de la (méta)cognition. Thèse de l’Université Paul Valéry de Montpellier, http://www.theses.fr/2018MON30062

Smith, S. M. (1994). Theoretical principles of context-dependent memory. In P. Morris & M. Gruneberg (Eds.), Theoretical aspects of memory (2nd ed., pp. 168–195). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203978108CrossRef

Susser, J. A. (2014). Motoric fluency in actions: Effects on metamemory and memory. Doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. https://www.proquest.com/openview/634ea3a2c3899cfd79c7792d1196d52d/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750

Susser, J. A., & Mulligan, N. W. (2015). The effect of motoric fluency on metamemory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22(4), 1014–1019. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0768-1CrossRefPubMed

Susser, J. A., Panitz, J., Buchin, Z., & Mulligan, N. W. (2017). The motoric fluency effect on metamemory. Journal of Memory and Language, 95, 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.03.002CrossRef

Thomson, D. M., & Tulving, E. (1970). Associative encoding and retrieval: Weak and strong cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86(2), 255. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0029997CrossRef

Topolinski, S. (2010). Moving the eye of the beholder: Motor components in vision determine aesthetic preference. Psychological Science, 21(9), 1220–1224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610378308CrossRefPubMed

Topolinski, S. (2012). The sensorimotor contributions to implicit memory, familiarity, and recollection. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 141(2), 260–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025658CrossRefPubMed

Topolinski, S., & Strack, F. (2009). Motormouth: mere exposure depends on stimulus-specific motor simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35(2), 423–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014504CrossRefPubMed

Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness. Canadian Psychology/psychologie Canadienne, 26(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0080017CrossRef

Tulving, E. (2002). Episodic memory: From mind to brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135114CrossRefPubMed

Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80(5), 352. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0020071CrossRef

von Helmholtz, H. L. F. (1867). In E. Trad, E. T. Javal, & N. T. H. Klein (Eds.), Optique physiologique. Masson.

Wagenmakers, E. J., Love, J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., & Morey, R. D. (2018a). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example applications with JASP. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 25(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1323-7CrossRefPubMed

Wagenmakers, E. J., Marsman, M., Jamil, T., Ly, A., Verhagen, J., Love, J., & Morey, R. D. (2018b). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I: Theoretical advantages and practical ramifications. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 25(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1343-3CrossRefPubMed

Whittlesea, B. W. A. (1997). Production, evaluation, and preservation of experiences: Constructive processing in remembering and performance tasks. In D. L. Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (37th ed., pp. 211–264). Academic Press.

Whittlesea, B. W. (2002). Two routes to remembering (and another to remembering not). Journal of Experimental Psychology, 131(3), 325. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.131.3.325CrossRefPubMed

Whittlesea, B. W., Jacoby, L. L., & Girard, K. (1990). Illusions of immediate memory: Evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(6), 716–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90045-2CrossRef

Whittlesea, B. W., & Leboe, J. P. (2000). The heuristic basis of remembering and classification: Fluency, generation, and resemblance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 129(1), 84. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.129.1.84CrossRefPubMed

Whittlesea, B. W., & Leboe, J. P. (2003). Two fluency heuristics (and how to tell them apart). Journal of Memory and Language, 49(1), 62–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00009-3CrossRef

Whittlesea, B. W., & Williams, L. D. (1998). Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don’t? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. Acta Psychologica, 98(2–3), 141–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00040-1CrossRefPubMed

Whittlesea, B. W., & Williams, L. D. (2000). The source of feelings of familiarity: the discrepancy-attribution hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26(3), 547. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.3.547CrossRefPubMed

Whittlesea, B. W., & Williams, L. D. (2001a). The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: I. The heuristic basis of feelings and familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.3CrossRefPubMed

Whittlesea, B. W., & Williams, L. D. (2001b). The discrepancy-attribution hypothesis: II. Expectation, uncertainty, surprise, and feelings of familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.14CrossRefPubMed

Wiese, W., & Metzinger, T. (2017). Vanilla PP for philosophers: A primer on predictive processing. In T. Metzinger & W. Wiese (Eds.), Philosophy and predictive processing. MIND Group.

Woltin, K. A., & Guinote, A. (2015). I can, I do, and so I like: From power to action and aesthetic preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 144(6), 1124. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000095CrossRefPubMed

Yang, S. J., Gallo, D. A., & Beilock, S. L. (2009). Embodied memory judgments: a case of motor fluency. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35(5), 1359. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016547CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Experience of memory: transfer of the motor feeling of fluency linked to our interaction with the environment
Auteurs: D. Brouillet
S. Rousset
D. Perrin
Publicatiedatum: 27-12-2022
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 6/2023
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01759-8

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2023

Empowering episodic memory through a model-based egocentric navigational training

Differences of resource allocation to active and passive states in visual working memory

Manual action re-planning interferes with the maintenance process of working memory: an ERP investigation

The effect of background sounds on mind wandering

Time distortions induced by high-arousing emotional compared to low-arousing neutral faces: an event-related potential study

The value of banknotes: relevance of size, colour and design