Subjects: Psychology >> Developmental Psychology submitted time 2023-03-28 Cooperative journals: 《心理科学进展》
Abstract： Associative memory (item 1 - item 2) has three discrete components: item 1, item 2, and the association between item 1 and item 2. The recognition of item 1 and item 2 is referred to as item recognition, whereas the recognition of the pairing relationship between item1 and item2 is called associative recognition. The dual-process theory posits that both familiarity and recollection can contribute to item recognition, though associative recognition can only be supported by recollection. Nonetheless, many recent studies found otherwise, particularly when the to-be-learned items are perceived as a single unitized representation during the study, familiarity can also contribute to associative recognition. However, very few studies have yet to examine the role of unitization on item recognition in associative memory. Currently, there are two opposing point of views. One is the ‘benefits only’ account, which claims that unitization can increase the associative recognition without affecting the item recognition; the other is the ‘costs and benefits’ account, which claims that the unitization increases the associative recognition at the cost of item recognition. Future studies are needed to investigate the impact of unitization on item recognition in associative memory and its neural mechanisms. Understanding the specific role of unitization in item and associative recognition will help to select appropriate encoding methods for specific memory tasks to improve memory performance.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： It is widely accepted that unitization can promote familiarity-based associative recognition, but its effect on recognition of individual components remains unclear. A few studies have focused on this question and shown two different accounts: One is “benefits and costs” account which argues that unitization promote associative recognition at the cost of item recognition, the other is “benefits-only” account which holds that unitization can promote associative recognition without impairing item recognition. In the current study, we aimed to explore how unitization influence associative and item recognition. Twenty-nine participants took part in the study. To avoid fatigue effects, three study-test cycles were completed with a short break (2 min) in between. For each cycle, 96 word pairs were encoded at a rate of 4 s each, with a 900~1100 ms fixation cross between trials. Forty-eight word pairs were presented in compound word pairs (CW) and 48 word pairs were presented in non-compound word pairs (NCW). After a 2-min distracting phase, participants took part in an associative recognition test, in which 64 word pairs were presented: (1) CW-intact word pairs, (2) CW-rearranged word pairs, (3) NCW-intact word pairs, and (4) NCW-rearranged word pairs. In order to matched the level of unitzation between the studied and tested word pairs, two compound word pairs were rearranged into a new compound word pairs, and the same is true of non-compound word pairs. The remaining four words were used as old stimuli in item recognition test. After all three cycles are completed, participants then took part in an item recognition test. The item test was also divided into three cycles. For each cycle, 96 single words were presented: (1) Compound-old words, (2) Non-compound-old words, and (3) new words. In both associative and item recognition tests, participants were instructed to press the “F” if the word pairs or words had been learned at encoding and to press the “J” otherwise. Meanwhile, the EEG was recorded. First, the results showed higher level of unitization and faster RTs for compound word pairs than for non-compound word pairs at encoding. It indicated that the manipulation of unitization was effective in the current study. Second, concerning associative recognition, an enhanced recognition performance, with a larger familiarity-related FN400 effect and recollection-related LPC effect, was observed for compound word pairs than for non-compound word pairs. This results suggested that unitization could improve associative recognition performance through increasing the contribution of familiarity and recollection simultaneously. And finally, an equivalent item recognition performance between the two word pairs was found, despite the compound word pairs elicited a larger FN400 effect than the non-compound word pairs. This indicated that unitization did not impair the item recognition performance. In summary, the current study suggests that unitization not only facilitates associative recognition but also does not impair item recognition, supporting the “benefits-only” account. Importantly, familiarity can support associative recognition when the two items were unitized into a new presentation. This means that unitization is an effective strategy for improving associative memory, especially for groups with impaired recollection.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： The two main theoretical views of emotional word processing are conflicting. According to standard psycholinguistics, emotions are elicited within the reading network itself after semantic activation. However, neural reuse theories suggest that emotional words can be directly processed by the brain region that is activated in emotional information processing, similar to how emotional images, smell, and faces are processed. This means that emotional effects to words occur before semantics, which benefits human adaptability. The processing of emotional words in phonetic characters supports the view of neural reuse, but the processing of emotional words in ideographic texts has no evidence. An event-related potential experiment and a behavioral experiment were conducted to explore the processing of emotional information while reading at an implicit level. A total of 262 Chinese words were selected from the Chinese Affective Stimulus System. Among these words, 128 were disgust-related words, 100 were neutral words, and 34 were transportation-related words. We then selected 35 neutral words, 35 disgust-related words, and 24 transportation-related words that were matched on the basis of valence and arousal. Twenty Chinese college students (10 female) participated in the EEG experiment. They were asked to press the response button using their right index finger when the words they read were related to transportation (Go trials). Otherwise, they should not respond (No-go trials). Another 30 healthy individuals (15 female) participated in the behavioral experiment. However, they were asked to silently read the presented words and press the response button using their right index finger only when a given word was not related to transportation (Go trials). Otherwise, they should not respond (No-go trials). The EEG experiment showed that differences between disgust and neutral words appeared as early as 170 ms after the onset of stimulus. No significant effect of emotion was found on P100 (the early ERP component). However, a significant main effect of emotion was found for the early posterior negativity (EPN). Disgust-related words evoked a larger right EPN than neutral words did. A negative going wave reflecting the processing of meaning was found at approximately 400 ms, and source localization indicated a cortical generator of emotion effect near the left anterior insula. The inhibition response to disgust-related words generated greater late positive component than the response to neutral words. Specifically, disgust-related words evoked a much larger P600 amplitude compared with neutral words. Behavioral experiment results showed a significant difference between the reaction time to disgust-related words and neutral words. Participants responded faster to disgust-related words than to neutral words. Results indicate that negative emotional words have an advantage in processing over neutral words. Emotional response to negative emotional words occurs before the processing of their semantics. The processing of negative emotional words supports theory of neural reuse. This finding shows that the nervous system is highly flexible and can process information in an appropriate manner according to the needs in an actual situation. Moreover, when processing emotional information, ideographic Chinese emotional words start earlier and activate a wider range of brain regions than phonetic Western emotional words.
Subjects: Psychology >> Social Psychology submitted time 2023-03-27 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract： Unitization refers to the manipulation that can integrate two or more items into a single entirety. Previous studies found that unitization facilitated associative memory, however, the effect of unitization on item memory was controversial. Some researchers argued that unitization promoted associative recognition at the cost of item recognition (the view of “benefits and cost”), others held that unitization could promote associative recognition without impairing item recognition (the view of “benefits-only”). These two views seemed to be arguing the impact of unitization on item memory, but in fact, they were discussing the relationship between associative encoding and item encoding during unitization.The present study intended to explore the relationship between associative encoding and item encoding in the process of unitization through two experiments, by examining the effects of words unitization and characters unitization on associative memory and item memory as well as the differences of neural mechanisms between the two unitization strategies. In experiment 1, we used associative recognition paradigm to explore the unitization effects on associative memory. In the study phase, participants were asked to judge whether the character pairs could form to a multiple-component character (characters unitization) or a compound word (words unitization) or couldn’t (non-unitization). In the test phase, participants were asked to judge whether the character pairs were old or rearranged. In experiment 2, the item recognition paradigm was used. The procedure of the study phase was the same as in Experiment 1. In the test phase, participants were asked to judge whether the characters were old or new. In addition, the EEG signals were recorded during the task to explore the neural mechanism during memory encoding.The behavioral results showed that: i) the encoding process of characters unitization was more difficult and had longer response time compared to words unitization; ii) the performances of associative recognition was significantly higher for the words and characters unitization conditions than the non-unitization condition, and their performances of item recognition was not decreased; iii) the performances of associative recognition and item recognition was significantly higher for the characters unitization condition than words unitization condition. The EEG results showed that: iv) the LNC during words unitization encoding was mainly distributed in the frontal area and occurred earlier than characters unitization encoding, while the LNC during characters unitization encoding was mainly located in the occipital area and occurs later than words unitization encoding; v) the desynchronization of neural oscillation within α/β band was stronger for characters unitization condition compared to words unitization condition, and the desynchronization of neural oscillation within α/β band during encoding was significantly correlated with the hit of item recognition during retrieval.These results indicate from the perspectives of memory encoding and retrieval that the manipulation of unitization does not damage the processing of items while strengthening the processing of associative information, supporting the view of “benefits-only”. This research has deepened our understanding that the brain processes multiple-component Chinese characters and compound words, and also provided a reference for the arrangement of Chinese learning materials from the perspective of empirical evidence.
Subjects: Psychology >> Cognitive Psychology submitted time 2022-12-03
Abstract：
Unitization refers to the manipulation that can integrate two or more items into a single entirety. Previous studies found that unitization facilitated associative memory, however, the effect of unitization on item memory was controversial. Some researchers argued that unitization promoted associative recognition at the cost of item recognition (the view of “benefits and cost”), others held that unitization could promote associative recognition without impairing item recognition (the view of “benefits-only”). These two views seemed to be arguing the impact of unitization on item memory, but in fact, they were discussing the relationship between associative encoding and item encoding during unitization.
The present study intended to explore the relationship between associative encoding and item encoding in the process of unitization through two experiments, by examining the effects of words unitization and characters unitization on associative memory and item memory as well as the differences of neural mechanisms between the two unitization strategies. In experiment 1, we used associative recognition paradigm to explore the unitization effects on associative memory. In the study phase, participants were asked to judge whether the character pairs could form to a multiple-component character (characters unitization) or a compound word (words unitization) or couldn’t (non-unitization). In the test phase, participants were asked to judge whether the character pairs were old or rearranged. In experiment 2, the item recognition paradigm was used. The procedure of the study phase was the same as in Experiment 1. In the test phase, participants were asked to judge whether the characters were old or new. In addition, the EEG signals were recorded during the task to explore the neural mechanism during memory encoding.
The behavioral results showed that: ⅰ) the encoding process of characters unitization was more difficult and had longer response time compared to words unitization; ⅱ) the performances of associative recognition was significantly higher for the words and characters unitization conditions than the non-unitization condition, and their performances of item recognition was not decreased; ⅲ) the performances of associative recognition and item recognition was significantly higher for the characters unitization condition than words unitization condition. The EEG results showed that: ⅳ) the LNC during words unitization encoding was mainly distributed in the frontal area and occurred earlier than characters unitization encoding, while the LNC during characters unitization encoding was mainly located in the occipital area and occurs later than words unitization encoding; ⅴ) the desynchronization of neural oscillation within α/β band was stronger for characters unitization condition compared to words unitization condition, and the desynchronization of neural oscillation within α/β band during encoding was significantly correlated with the hit of item recognition during retrieval.
These results indicate from the perspectives of memory encoding and retrieval that the manipulation of unitization does not damage the processing of items while strengthening the processing of associative information, supporting the view of “benefits-only”. This research has deepened our understanding that the brain processes multiple-component Chinese characters and compound words, and also provided a reference for the arrangement of Chinese learning materials from the perspective of empirical evidence.
Peer Review Status:
Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Cognitive Psychology submitted time 2022-06-03
Abstract：
It is widely accepted that unitization can promote familiarity-based associative recognition, but its effect on recognition of individual components remains unclear. A few studies have focused on this question and shown two different accounts: One is “benefits and costs” account which argues that unitization promote associative recognition at the cost of item recognition, the other is “benefits-only” account which holds that unitization can promote associative recognition without impairing item recognition. In the current study, we aimed to explore how unitization influence associative and item recognition.
Twenty-nine participants took part in the study. To avoid fatigue effects, three study-test cycles were completed with a short break (2 min) in between. For each cycle, 96 word pairs were encoded at a rate of 4 s each, with a 900 ~ 1100 ms fixation cross between trials. Forty-eight word pairs were presented in compound word pairs (CW) and 48 word pairs were presented in non-compound word pairs (NCW). After a 2-min distracting phase, participants took part in an associative recognition test, in which 64 word pairs were presented: (1) CW-intact word pairs, (2) CW-rearranged word pairs, (3) NCW-intact word pairs, and (4) NCW-rearranged word pairs. In order to matched the level of unitzation between the studied and tested word pairs, two compound word pairs were rearranged into a new compound word pairs, and the same is true of non-compound word pairs. The remaining four words were used as old stimuli in item recognition test. After all three cycles are completed, participants then took part in an item recognition test. The item test was also divided into three cycles. For each cycle, 96 single words were presented: (1) Compound-old words, (2) Non-compound-old words, and (3) new words. In both associative and item recognition tests, participants were instructed to press the “F” if the word pairs or words had been learned at encoding and to press the “J” otherwise. Meanwhile, the EEG was recorded.
First, the results showed higher level of unitization and faster RTs for compound word pairs than for non-compound word pairs at encoding. It indicated that the manipulation of unitization was effective in the current study. Second, concerning associative recognition, an enhanced recognition performance, with a larger familiarity-related FN400 effect and recollection-related LPC effect, was observed for compound word pairs than for non-compound word pairs. This results suggested that unitization could improve associative recognition performance through increasing the contribution of familiarity and recollection simultaneously. And finally, an equivalent item recognition performance between the two word pairs was found, despite the compound word pairs elicited a larger FN400 effect than the non-compound word pairs. This indicated that unitization did not impair the item recognition performance.
In summary, the current study suggests that unitization not only facilitates associative recognition but also does not impair item recognition, supporting the “benefits-only” account. Importantly, familiarity can support associative recognition when the two items were unitized into a new presentation. This means that unitization is an effective strategy for improving associative memory, especially for groups with impaired recollection.
Peer Review Status:Awaiting Review
Subjects: Psychology >> Other Disciplines of Psychology submitted time 2018-09-13 Cooperative journals: 《心理学报》
Abstract：研究使用ERPs技术, 考察了双语者在联结再认中是否存在第二语言记忆优势效应。实验要求被试完成维吾尔语(L1)和汉语(L2)两类“学习−测试”任务。学习阶段要求被试学习混合呈现的复合词和无关词, 测验阶段要求被试区分“旧”、“重组”或“新”词对。行为结果发现：(1)复合词中, L2的正确率高于L1, L2的反应时快于L1; 无关词中, L2的正确率与L1无显著差异, 但L2的反应时快于L1。(2) 在L2和L1中, 复合词的正确率均高于无关词, 反应时均快于无关词。ERPs结果发现：(1)在高整合条件下, L2仅诱发了FN400效应, L1诱发了FN400效应和LPC效应; 在低整合条件下, L2和L1都只诱发了LPC效应。(2)在时间进程上, L2和L1分别在650 ms和900 ms完成联结关系的提取。上述结果表明, 在高整合条件下, 双语者在联结再认中存在L2记忆优势。此外, 实验结果也从双语角度证明了, 整合编码能促进熟悉性在维吾尔语联结再认中发挥作用。本研究结果的实践意义在于, 为我国少数民族学生习得国家通用语言文字提供了认知神经科学依据。
Hits
Hits
Downloads
Comment