❌

Reading view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.
↗️

Tip-of-the-pen states in Mandarin handwriting: The effect of brief non-target language exposure

✇Latest Results for Memory & Cognition

Abstract

The tip-of-the-pen (TOP) is a phenomenon in which individuals fail to completely retrieve the orthographic information of a known character, and mainly occurs in Mandarin (a non-alphabetic language in which the orthography is largely independent of the phonology). The present study examined whether and how long-term language experience and brief exposure to non-target language affected TOP rates in Mandarin handwriting. In Experiment 1, high and low proficiency Mandarin-English bilinguals completed a Mandarin character dictation task before and after watching a short English movie. The results revealed similar increases in TOP rates for both groups following the English movie. In Experiment 2, Cantonese-Mandarin bidialectals and native Mandarin speakers completed a protocol similar to Experiment 1, but the movie was replaced with a Cantonese movie. Notably, TOP rates significantly increased for bidialectals after the Cantonese movie, but the rates of incorrect responses increased for native speakers. These findings suggest that brief exposure to non-target language exerted a non-item-specific, global interference effect in written production, and also imply that the underlying mechanisms may be modulated by non-target language familiarity.

↗️

Disgust memory enhancement extends to more accurate memory but not more false memories

✇Latest Results for Memory & Cognition

Abstract

People show enhanced memory recall for disgust over fear, despite both being highly negative and arousing emotions. But does disgust’s ‘stickiness’ in memory result in more false memories for disgust versus fear? Existing research finds low false-memory rates for disgust and fear, perhaps from using image lures depicting content unrelated to target images. Therefore, we presented 111 participants with disgust, fear, (and neutral) images during an attention-monitoring task. After 24–48 hours, participants completed a recognition test, where they viewed ‘old’ (previously seen) and ‘new’ images (both related and unrelated lures) and indicated whether each image was ‘old’ or ‘new’. Relative to fear, participants experienced fewer false memories of disgust for unrelated lures, but similar false memories for related lures. Furthermore, participants’ attention was captured more by disgust than fear images, and correct recognition and memory sensitivity were enhanced for disgust relative to fear. Our findings suggest disgust memory enhancement extends to accurate memory, which has clinical implications.

↗️

Effects of sample size information and within- and between-category similarity on study choices in self-regulated learning

✇Latest Results for Memory & Cognition

Abstract

Category learning is usually better supported by interleaved training (alternating between exemplars from different categories) than by blocked training (studying all exemplars within a category sequentially), yet when asked to choose between the two strategies most people endorse blocking as superior. We used a prototype category-learning task to examine the effects of between- and within-category similarity and knowledge of the number of stimuli to be studied on study sequencing choices during self-regulated learning. Across three experiments (including a complete replication), participants who viewed the number of stimuli in each category showed more interleaving in comparison with those who did not, indicating that participants adjusted their strategy based on the projected length of the study phase. Participants informed about the number of stimuli also showed greater interleaving when within-category similarity was high and greater blocking when within-category similarity was low; this difference was not found when participants were not told the number of stimuli to be studied. Between-category similarity did not affect degree of blocking versus interleaving. Overall, interleaving decreased over training and blocking increased. Most participants endorsed hybrid strategies in which blocking was combined with at least some interleaving on a metacognitive questionnaire, but when forced to choose between exclusive blocking and exclusive interleaving, the majority endorsed blocking. These results indicate that participants are sensitive to category structure and expectations about task length when choosing stimuli to study during self-regulated learning, and adjust their strategy across the time course of study.

↗️

Estimation of factorial expressions and its improvement through calibration: A replication and extension of Tversky and Kahneman (1973)

✇Latest Results for Memory & Cognition

Abstract

Fifty years ago, Tversky and Kahneman (Cognitive Psychology, 5[2], 207–232, 1973) reported that people’s speeded estimations of 8 × 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1 were notably higher than their estimations for the equivalent expression in the opposite order, 1 × 2 × 3 × 4 × 5 × 6 × 7 × 8 (Median = 2,250 vs. 512, respectively). On top of this order effect, both groups grossly underestimated the correct value (40,320). The differential effect of the two orders on estimation has become famous as an early demonstration of the anchoring effect, where people’s judgments under uncertainty are unduly influenced by an initial reference point (or “anchor”). Despite this fame, to the best of our knowledge, this effect has never been replicated. In a sample of 253 U.S. adults, the current study provides the first replication of this foundational example of anchoring. It extends this effect for the first time to a within-participants design, revealing its relative robustness even among participants who see the descending order first. Drawing on procedures from the mathematical cognition literature, it shows how the anchoring effect can be mitigated: calibrating to the correct value of 6! reduces this effect, and calibrating to 10! eliminates it altogether. An individual differences analysis measures the arithmetic fluency of participants and their accuracy on a new estimation assessment, and finds that higher estimation ability may be a “protective factor” against some anchoring effects. These findings affirm the anchoring effect of Tversky and Kahneman (1973, Study 6) while suggesting that calibration may be an effective strategy for helping to improve people’s estimation of superlinear functions that are important in real-life contexts.

↗️

Valence-based biases in collective temporal thought: The role of question framing, culture, and age

✇Latest Results for Memory & Cognition

Abstract

Collective temporal thought includes individuals’ memories of group experiences and expectations about the group’s collective future. Prior studies have found inconsistent valence biases (e.g., positivity) in North American collective memory and consistently negative biases in collective future thought. Discrepancies in collective memory valence biases may be due to different question framing across studies. Moreover, a limited number of studies extend collective temporal thought research beyond Western nations and few studies examine potential age-related differences in this area. Therefore, the present study investigates valence-based biases in collective temporal thought from the perspective of question framing, culture, and participant age. Participants (N = 1,548) included younger (20–39 years) and older (60+ years) adults from the USA and mainland China. Whereas Americans’ collective memory biases varied across question framings, Chinese participants consistently displayed positivity biases. The American bias patterns were specific to collective memory and did not carry over to collective future thought ratings. Chinese participants showed higher dialectical thinking than American participants and dialectical thinking positively correlated with the proportion of positive events reported. Older adults generated significantly more positive events than younger adults, more so in collective memory than in collective future thought. Overall, collective temporal thinking is influenced by question framing, cultural context, and participant age.

↗️

Does familiarity-detection flip attention inward? The familiarity-flip-of-attention account of the primacy effect in memory for repetitions

✇Latest Results for Memory & Cognition

Abstract

In cognitive psychology, research on attention is shifting from focusing primarily on how people orient toward stimuli in the environment toward instead examining how people orient internally toward memory representations. With this new shift the question arises: What factors in the environment send attention inward? A recent proposal is that one factor is cue familiarity-detection (Cleary, Irving & Mills, Cognitive Science, 47, e13274, 2023). Within this theoretical framework, we reinterpret a decades-old empirical pattern—a primacy effect in memory for repetitions—in a novel way. The effect is the finding that altered repetitions of an image were remembered as re-occurrences of the first presentation despite having a changed left–right orientation; participants better retained the first orientation while incorrectly remembering changed instantiations as repetitions of the first orientation (DiGirolamo & Hintzman, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 121–124, 1997). We argue that this pattern, which has never been fully explained, is an existing empirical test of the newly proposed mechanism of cue familiarity-detection flipping attention inward toward memory. Specifically, an image’s first appearance is novel so draws attention outward toward encoding the stimulus’ attributes like orientation; subsequent mirror-reversed appearances are detected as familiar so flip attention inward toward memory search, which leads to 1) inattentional blindness for the changed orientation due to the familiarity-driven shift of attention inward and 2) memory retrieval of the first instance and its orientation, thereby enhancing memory for the first instance and its previously encoded attributes like orientation.

❌