The role of culture and semantic organization in working memory updating.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Memory Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-10 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2024.2351062
Krystal R Leger, Hannah R Snyder, Aysecan Boduroglu, Angela Gutchess
{"title":"The role of culture and semantic organization in working memory updating.","authors":"Krystal R Leger, Hannah R Snyder, Aysecan Boduroglu, Angela Gutchess","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2024.2351062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Westerners tend to relate items in a categorical manner, whereas Easterners focus more on functional relationships. The present study extended research on semantic organization in long-term memory to working memory. First, Americans' and Turks' preferences for categorical versus functional relationships were tested. Second, working memory interference was assessed using a 2-back working memory paradigm in which lure items were categorically and functionally related to targets. Next, a mediation model tested direct effects of culture and semantic organization on working memory task behaviour, and the indirect effect, whether semantic organization mediated the relationship between culture and working memory interference. Whereas Americans had slower response times to correctly rejecting functional lures compared to categorical lures, conditions did not differ for Turks. However, semantic organization did not mediate cultural difference in working memory interference. Across cultures, there was evidence that semantic organization affected working memory errors, with individuals who endorsed categorical more than functional pairings committing more categorical than functional errors on the 2-back task. Results align with prior research suggesting individual differences in use of different types of semantic relationships, and further that literature by indicating effects on interference in working memory. However, these individual differences may not be culture-dependent.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11262971/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2024.2351062","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Westerners tend to relate items in a categorical manner, whereas Easterners focus more on functional relationships. The present study extended research on semantic organization in long-term memory to working memory. First, Americans' and Turks' preferences for categorical versus functional relationships were tested. Second, working memory interference was assessed using a 2-back working memory paradigm in which lure items were categorically and functionally related to targets. Next, a mediation model tested direct effects of culture and semantic organization on working memory task behaviour, and the indirect effect, whether semantic organization mediated the relationship between culture and working memory interference. Whereas Americans had slower response times to correctly rejecting functional lures compared to categorical lures, conditions did not differ for Turks. However, semantic organization did not mediate cultural difference in working memory interference. Across cultures, there was evidence that semantic organization affected working memory errors, with individuals who endorsed categorical more than functional pairings committing more categorical than functional errors on the 2-back task. Results align with prior research suggesting individual differences in use of different types of semantic relationships, and further that literature by indicating effects on interference in working memory. However, these individual differences may not be culture-dependent.

文化和语义组织在工作记忆更新中的作用。
西方人倾向于以分类的方式将项目联系起来,而东方人则更注重功能关系。本研究将有关长时记忆语义组织的研究扩展到了工作记忆。首先,测试了美国人和土耳其人对分类关系和功能关系的偏好。其次,使用2-back工作记忆范式对工作记忆干扰进行评估,在该范式中,引诱项与目标项存在分类和功能关系。接下来,一个中介模型测试了文化和语义组织对工作记忆任务行为的直接影响,以及间接影响,即语义组织是否中介了文化和工作记忆干扰之间的关系。与分类诱饵相比,美国人正确拒绝功能诱饵的反应时间较慢,而土耳其人的情况则没有差异。然而,语义组织并不能调节工作记忆干扰的文化差异。在不同文化中,有证据表明语义组织影响了工作记忆错误,在2-back任务中,赞同分类配对的个体比赞同功能配对的个体犯的分类错误要多于功能错误。研究结果与之前的研究结果一致,表明在使用不同类型的语义关系时存在个体差异,并通过对工作记忆干扰的影响进一步证实了这一点。然而,这些个体差异可能与文化无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信