Examining the semantic relatedness effect on working memory with ad hoc categories.

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Memory & Cognition Pub Date : 2025-08-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-07 DOI:10.3758/s13421-025-01692-2
Sho Ishiguro, Dominic Guitard, Jean Saint-Aubin
{"title":"Examining the semantic relatedness effect on working memory with ad hoc categories.","authors":"Sho Ishiguro, Dominic Guitard, Jean Saint-Aubin","doi":"10.3758/s13421-025-01692-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The semantic relatedness effect, a memory advantage of semantically related items (e.g., \"penguin, giraffe, goat\"), is well established in the literature on working memory (WM). Nevertheless, it remains unclear what mechanisms are responsible for this effect. Although an influential account ascribes it to the cue-dependent retrieval process (e.g., \"animal\" works as a cue for \"penguin, giraffe, goat\"), this account has not yet been fully investigated. This is partly because the influence of cues cannot be directly tested in typical studies using common categories (e.g., \"animal\" is likely to be generated and used by participants, but the generation and use of cues are uncontrollable for the experimenter). The present study, by introducing ad hoc categories and cueing ad hoc category labels, directly tested the influence of cues. Specifically, seemingly unrelated items (e.g., \"bone, fly, car\") were presented with or without the corresponding ad hoc category label (e.g., \"things that dogs chase\"). Four experiments demonstrated that providing ad hoc category labels affected WM performance. Importantly, providing the labels improved item memory in WM (Experiments 2 and 3). This supported the retrieval-cue account. Nevertheless, the effect was small (Experiments 2 and 3) and was not found in an experiment (Experiment 1). In contrast, providing the labels had a substantial and systematic effect on long-term memory, suggesting that the manipulation of providing the labels, per se, was successful. The current study's implications for research on WM and ad hoc categories were also discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48398,"journal":{"name":"Memory & Cognition","volume":" ","pages":"1944-1962"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-025-01692-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The semantic relatedness effect, a memory advantage of semantically related items (e.g., "penguin, giraffe, goat"), is well established in the literature on working memory (WM). Nevertheless, it remains unclear what mechanisms are responsible for this effect. Although an influential account ascribes it to the cue-dependent retrieval process (e.g., "animal" works as a cue for "penguin, giraffe, goat"), this account has not yet been fully investigated. This is partly because the influence of cues cannot be directly tested in typical studies using common categories (e.g., "animal" is likely to be generated and used by participants, but the generation and use of cues are uncontrollable for the experimenter). The present study, by introducing ad hoc categories and cueing ad hoc category labels, directly tested the influence of cues. Specifically, seemingly unrelated items (e.g., "bone, fly, car") were presented with or without the corresponding ad hoc category label (e.g., "things that dogs chase"). Four experiments demonstrated that providing ad hoc category labels affected WM performance. Importantly, providing the labels improved item memory in WM (Experiments 2 and 3). This supported the retrieval-cue account. Nevertheless, the effect was small (Experiments 2 and 3) and was not found in an experiment (Experiment 1). In contrast, providing the labels had a substantial and systematic effect on long-term memory, suggesting that the manipulation of providing the labels, per se, was successful. The current study's implications for research on WM and ad hoc categories were also discussed.

特别类别对工作记忆的语义关联效应研究。
语义关联效应是语义相关的记忆优势(如“企鹅、长颈鹿、山羊”),在工作记忆(WM)的文献中得到了很好的证实。然而,目前尚不清楚是什么机制造成了这种影响。虽然一个有影响力的解释将其归因于线索依赖的检索过程(例如,“动物”可以作为“企鹅,长颈鹿,山羊”的线索),但这一解释尚未得到充分调查。这在一定程度上是因为线索的影响不能直接在典型研究中使用常见类别进行测试(例如,“动物”可能是由参与者产生和使用的,但线索的产生和使用对实验者来说是不可控的)。本研究通过引入特设类别和特设类别标签,直接测试了线索的影响。具体来说,看似不相关的项目(例如,“骨头,苍蝇,汽车”)被呈现或没有相应的特殊类别标签(例如,“狗追逐的东西”)。四个实验表明,提供特别的类别标签会影响WM的性能。重要的是,提供标签改善了WM中的项目记忆(实验2和3)。这支持了检索线索说。然而,这种影响很小(实验2和3),并且在实验(实验1)中没有发现。相反,提供标签对长期记忆有实质性和系统性的影响,这表明提供标签的操作本身是成功的。本文还讨论了当前研究对WM和特设分类研究的启示。
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 & Cognition
Memory & Cognition PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.30%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Memory & Cognition covers human memory and learning, conceptual processes, psycholinguistics, problem solving, thinking, decision making, and skilled performance, including relevant work in the areas of computer simulation, information processing, mathematical psychology, developmental psychology, and experimental social psychology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信