唱歌并不一定比朗读更能提高记忆力。

IF 1.1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Jedidiah W Whitridge, Mark J Huff, Jason D Ozubko, Paul C Bürkner, Chelsea D Lahey, Jonathan M Fawcett
{"title":"唱歌并不一定比朗读更能提高记忆力。","authors":"Jedidiah W Whitridge, Mark J Huff, Jason D Ozubko, Paul C Bürkner, Chelsea D Lahey, Jonathan M Fawcett","doi":"10.1027/1618-3169/a000614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b></b> The <i>production effect</i> refers to the finding that words read aloud are better remembered than words read silently. This finding is typically attributed to the presence of additional sensorimotor features appended to the memory trace by the act of reading aloud, which are not present for items read silently. Supporting this perspective, the production effect tends to be larger for singing (the <i>singing superiority effect</i>) than reading aloud, possibly due to the inclusion of further sensorimotor features (e.g., more pronounced tone). However, the singing superiority effect has not always replicated. Across four experiments, we demonstrate a production effect for items read aloud but observe a singing superiority effect only when items are tested in the same color in which they were studied (with foils randomized to color). A series of meta-analytic models revealed the singing superiority effect to be smaller than previously thought and to emerge only when test items are presented in the same color in which they were studied. This outcome is inconsistent with common distinctiveness-based theoretical accounts.</p>","PeriodicalId":12173,"journal":{"name":"Experimental psychology","volume":"71 1","pages":"33-50"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Singing Does Not Necessarily Improve Memory More Than Reading Aloud.\",\"authors\":\"Jedidiah W Whitridge, Mark J Huff, Jason D Ozubko, Paul C Bürkner, Chelsea D Lahey, Jonathan M Fawcett\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/1618-3169/a000614\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b></b> The <i>production effect</i> refers to the finding that words read aloud are better remembered than words read silently. This finding is typically attributed to the presence of additional sensorimotor features appended to the memory trace by the act of reading aloud, which are not present for items read silently. Supporting this perspective, the production effect tends to be larger for singing (the <i>singing superiority effect</i>) than reading aloud, possibly due to the inclusion of further sensorimotor features (e.g., more pronounced tone). However, the singing superiority effect has not always replicated. Across four experiments, we demonstrate a production effect for items read aloud but observe a singing superiority effect only when items are tested in the same color in which they were studied (with foils randomized to color). A series of meta-analytic models revealed the singing superiority effect to be smaller than previously thought and to emerge only when test items are presented in the same color in which they were studied. This outcome is inconsistent with common distinctiveness-based theoretical accounts.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12173,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experimental psychology\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"33-50\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experimental psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000614\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000614","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

朗读效果是指朗读的单词比默读的单词记忆效果更好。这一发现通常被认为是由于朗读行为在记忆痕迹中附加了额外的感觉运动特征,而默读项目则没有这些特征。与这一观点相印证的是,与朗读相比,歌唱的生成效应(歌唱优势效应)往往更大,这可能是由于朗读中包含了更多的感觉运动特征(如更明显的音调)。然而,歌唱优势效应并不总能得到验证。在四项实验中,我们证明了朗读项目的生产效应,但只有在用与研究项目相同的颜色进行测试时(箔随机分配颜色),才能观察到歌唱优势效应。一系列元分析模型显示,歌唱优势效应比之前认为的要小,而且只有当测试项目以与研究项目相同的颜色呈现时,歌唱优势效应才会出现。这一结果与常见的基于独特性的理论说法不一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Singing Does Not Necessarily Improve Memory More Than Reading Aloud.

The production effect refers to the finding that words read aloud are better remembered than words read silently. This finding is typically attributed to the presence of additional sensorimotor features appended to the memory trace by the act of reading aloud, which are not present for items read silently. Supporting this perspective, the production effect tends to be larger for singing (the singing superiority effect) than reading aloud, possibly due to the inclusion of further sensorimotor features (e.g., more pronounced tone). However, the singing superiority effect has not always replicated. Across four experiments, we demonstrate a production effect for items read aloud but observe a singing superiority effect only when items are tested in the same color in which they were studied (with foils randomized to color). A series of meta-analytic models revealed the singing superiority effect to be smaller than previously thought and to emerge only when test items are presented in the same color in which they were studied. This outcome is inconsistent with common distinctiveness-based theoretical accounts.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Experimental psychology
Experimental psychology PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: As its name implies, Experimental Psychology (ISSN 1618-3169) publishes innovative, original, high-quality experimental research in psychology — quickly! It aims to provide a particularly fast outlet for such research, relying heavily on electronic exchange of information which begins with the electronic submission of manuscripts, and continues throughout the entire review and production process. The scope of the journal is defined by the experimental method, and so papers based on experiments from all areas of psychology are published. In addition to research articles, Experimental Psychology includes occasional theoretical and review articles.
×
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