Do animacy effects persist in memory for context?

Abstract : The adaptive view of human memory (Nairne, 2010) assumes that animates (e.g., rabbit) are remembered better than inanimates (e.g., glass) because animates are ultimately more important for fitness than inanimates. Previous studies provided evidence for this view by showing that animates were recalled or recognized better than inanimates (e.g., Nairne, VanArsdall, Pandeirada, Cogdill, & LeBreton, 2013), but they did not assess memory for contextual details (e.g., where animates vs. inanimates occurred). In this study, we tested recollection of spatial information (Study 1) and temporal information (Study 2) associated with animate versus inanimate words. The findings showed that the two types of contextual information were remembered better when they were related to animates than to inanimates. These findings provide further evidence for an ultimate explanation of animacy effects.
Type de document :
Article dans une revue
The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 2017, pp.1 - 33. 〈10.1080/17470218.2017.1307866〉
Liste complète des métadonnées

https://hal-univ-bourgogne.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01579623
Contributeur : Lead - Université de Bourgogne <>
Soumis le : jeudi 31 août 2017 - 14:18:34
Dernière modification le : vendredi 8 juin 2018 - 14:50:07

Lien texte intégral

Identifiants

Collections

Citation

Margaux Gelin, Patrick Bonin, Alain Méot, Aurélia Bugaiska. Do animacy effects persist in memory for context?. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Section A, 2017, pp.1 - 33. 〈10.1080/17470218.2017.1307866〉. 〈hal-01579623〉

Partager

Métriques

Consultations de la notice

53