Top

Gepubliceerd in:

31-10-2023 | Research

Semantic relatedness can impair memory for item locations

Auteurs: Xinyi Lu, Mona J. H. Zhu, Evan F. Risko

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 3/2024

Abstract

While memory for semantically related items is improved over unrelated items in many cases, relatedness can also lead to memory costs. Here we examined how the semantic relatedness of words within a display influenced memory for their locations. Participants learned the locations of words inside grid displays; the words in a given display were either from a single category or were from different assorted categories. When a display containing words from a single category was compared to a scrambled display containing words from multiple categories, location memory performance was rendered worse, while word recall performance was significantly improved. Our results suggest that semantically structured spaces can both help and harm memory within the context of a location memory task. We hypothesize that relatedness can improve memory performance by increasing the likelihood that matching candidates will be retrieved, yet might worsen performance that requires distinguishing between similar target representations.

vorige artikel The ordinal distance effect in working memory: does it exist in the absence of confounds?

volgende artikel The effect of verbal praise on prospective memory

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Baddeley, A. D. (1966a). Short−term memory for word sequences as a function of acoustic, semantic and formal similarity. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(4), 362–365.CrossRefPubMed

Baddeley, A. D. (1966b). The influence of acoustic and semantic similarity on long−term memory for word sequences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(4), 302–309.CrossRefPubMed

Baddeley, A. D., & Hitch, G. (1974). Working memory. In Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 8, pp. 47−89). Academic press.

Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (2018). Parsimonious Mixed Models. ArXiv:1506.04967 [Stat]

Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed−effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01CrossRef

Bousfield, W. A., Sedgewick, C. H. W., & Cohen, B. H. (1954). Certain temporal characteristics of the recall of verbal associates. The American Journal of Psychology, 67(1), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.2307/1418075CrossRefPubMed

Castel, A. D., McCabe, D. P., & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Illusions of competence and overestimation of associative memory for identical items: Evidence from judgments of learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 107–111.CrossRef

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

Gardiner, J. M., Craik, F. I., & Birtwistle, J. (1972). Retrieval cues and release from proactive inhibition. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 778–783.CrossRef

Guérard, K., & Saint−Aubin, J. (2012). Assessing the effect of lexical variables in backward recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(2), 312.PubMed

Guerin, S. A., & Miller, M. B. (2008). Semantic organization of study materials has opposite effects on recognition and recall. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(2), 302–308. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.302CrossRef

Hirtle, S. C., & Mascolo, M. F. (1986). Effect of semantic clustering on the memory of spatial locations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 12(2), 182–189. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278−7393.12.2.182CrossRefPubMed

Hourihan, K. L., & Tullis, J. G. (2015). When will bigger be (recalled) better? the influence of category size on JOLs depends on test format. Memory & Cognition, 43(6), 910–921. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421−015−0516−4CrossRef

Howard, M. W., & Kahana, M. J. (2002). When does semantic similarity help episodic retrieval? Journal of Memory and Language, 46(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2798CrossRef

Hund, A. M., & Plumert, J. M. (2003). Does Information About What Things Are Influence Children’s Memory for Where Things Are? Developmental Psychology, 39(6), 939–948. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012−1649.39.6.939CrossRefPubMed

Hunt, R. R. (2013). Precision in memory through distinctive processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412463228CrossRef

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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022−5371(81)90138−9CrossRef

Hunt, R. R., & McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The enigma of organization and distinctiveness. Journal of Memory and Language, 32(4), 421–445. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1023CrossRef

Ishiguro, S., & Saito, S. (2021). The detrimental effect of semantic similarity in short−term memory tasks: A meta−regression approach. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(2), 384–408.CrossRef

Kahana, M. J. (2020). Computational MODELS OF MEMORY SEarch. Annual Review of Psychology, 71(1), 107–138. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev−psych−010418−103358CrossRefPubMed

Kahana, M. J., Diamond, N. B., & Aka, A. (2022). Laws of Human Memory PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/aczu9

Kowialiewski, B., Krasnoff, J., Mizrak, E., & Oberauer, K. (2023). Verbal working memory encodes phonological and semantic information differently. Cognition, 233, 105364.CrossRefPubMed

Kimball, D. R., Smith, T. A., & Kahana, M. J. (2007). The fSAM Model of False Recall. Psychological Review, 114(4), 954–993. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033−295X.114.4.954CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Lakens, D., & Caldwell, A. (2021). Simulation−based power analysis for factorial analysis of variance designs. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 251524592095150. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245920951503CrossRef

Lewis, M. Q. (1971). Categorized lists and cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 87(1), 129–131. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030179CrossRef

Lu, X., Kelly, M. O., & Risko, E. F. (2022). The gist of it: Offloading memory does not reduce the benefit of list categorisation. Memory, 30(4), 396–411. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2021.1989465CrossRef

Lu, X., Zhu, M. J. H., & Risko, E. F. (Under Review). Semantic partitioning facilitates memory for object location through category−partition cueing.

Mandler, G. (1967). Organization and Memory. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 1, pp. 327–372). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079−7421(08)60516−2

Matuschek, H., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., Baayen, H., & Bates, D. (2017). Balancing Type I error and power in linear mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 94, 305–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.01.001CrossRef

Matvey, G., Dunlosky, J., & Schwartz, B. (2006). The effects of categorical relatedness on judgements of learning (JOLs). Memory, 14(2), 253–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210500216844CrossRefPubMed

Mueller, M. L., Tauber, S. K., & Dunlosky, J. (2013). Contributions of beliefs and processing fluency to the effect of relatedness on judgments of learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 378–384.CrossRef

Mueller, M. L., Dunlosky, J., & Tauber, S. K. (2016). The effect of identical word pairs on people’s metamemory judgments: What are the contributions of processing fluency and beliefs about memory? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(4), 781–799.CrossRef

Neale, K., & Tehan, G. (2007). Age and redintegration in immediate memory and their relationship to task difficulty. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1940–1953.CrossRef

Neath, I., Saint−Aubin, J., & Surprenant, A. M. (2022). Semantic relatedness effects in serial recall but not in serial reconstruction of order. Experimental Psychology, 69(4), 196.CrossRef

Nelson, D. L., Kitto, K., Galea, D., McEvoy, C. L., & Bruza, P. D. (2013). How activation, entanglement, and searching a semantic network contribute to event memory. Memory & Cognition, 41(6), 797–819. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421−013−0312−yCrossRef

Postma, A., & De Haan, E. H. F. (1996). What was where? memory for object locations. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 49(1), 178–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755605CrossRef

Postma, A., Kessels, R. P. C., & van Asselen, M. (2008). How the brain remembers and forgets where things are: the neurocognition of object–location memory. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 32(8), 1339–1345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.05.001CrossRef

Puff, C. R. (1970). Role of clustering in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86(3), 384–386. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030189CrossRef

Quené, H., & van den Bergh, H. (2004). On multi−level modeling of data from repeated measures designs: a tutorial. Speech Communication, 43(1–2), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2004.02.004CrossRef

R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (3.6.0) [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/

Raaijmakers, J. G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88(2), 93–134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033−295X.88.2.93CrossRef

Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 803–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278−7393.21.4.803CrossRef

Romney, A. K., Brewer, D. D., & Batchelder, W. H. (1993). Predicting clustering from semantic structure. Psychological Science, 4(1), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467−9280.1993.tb00552.xCrossRef

Saint−Aubin, J., Ouellette, D., & Poirier, M. (2005). Semantic similarity and immediate serial recall: is there an effect on all trials. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(1), 171–177. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196364CrossRef

Saint−Aubin, J., & Poirier, M. (1999). Semantic similarity and immediate serial recall: Is there a detrimental effect on order information?. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 52(2), 367–394.CrossRef

Siegel, A. L. M., & Castel, A. D. (2018). Memory for important item−location associations in younger and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 33(1), 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000209CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Surprenant, A. M., Neath, I., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). Modeling age−related differences in immediate memory using SIMPLE. Journal of Memory and Language, 55(4), 572–586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.08.001CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Tompary, A., & Thompson−Schill, S. L. (2021). Semantic influences on episodic memory distortions. Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 150(9), 1800–1824. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001017CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Tse, C. −S. (2009). The role of associative strength in the semantic relatedness effect on immediate serial recall. Memory, 17(8), 874–891. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210903376250CrossRefPubMed

Tse, C. −S., Li, Y., & Altarriba, J. (2011). The effect of semantic relatedness on immediate serial recall and serial recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(12), 2425–2437. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.604787CrossRef

Tulving, E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 5(4), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022−5371(66)80048−8CrossRef

Underwood, B. J. (1957). Interference and forgetting. Psychological Review, 64(1), 49.CrossRefPubMed

Undorf, M., & Erdfelder, E. (2015). The relatedness effect on judgments of learning: a closer look at the contribution of processing fluency. Memory & Cognition, 43, 647–658.CrossRef

Van Overschelde, J. P., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). Category norms: an updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms. Journal of Memory and Language, 50(3), 289–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2003.10.003CrossRef

Vuorre, M. (2016). bmlm: Bayesian Multilevel Mediation (1.3.12) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bmlm

Titel: Semantic relatedness can impair memory for item locations
Auteurs: Xinyi Lu
Mona J. H. Zhu
Evan F. Risko
Publicatiedatum: 31-10-2023
Uitgeverij: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research / Uitgave 3/2024
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-023-01889-7

Andere artikelen Uitgave 3/2024

Forward effects from action observation: the role of attentional focus

Open Access
Research

It’s SNARC o’ clock: manipulating the salience of the context in a conceptual replication of Bächtold et al.’s (1998) clockface study

Open Access
Research

The ordinal distance effect in working memory: does it exist in the absence of confounds?

Research

Overlearned sequence and perceived time: possible involvement of attention

Research

Stimulus variability improves generalization following response inhibition training

Research

You do you: susceptibility of temporal binding to self-relevance

Open Access
Research