Adaptive memory: Determining the proximate mechanisms responsible for the memorial advantages of survival processing.

Abstract

J. S. Nairne, S. R. Thompson, and J. N. S. Pandeirada (2007) suggested that our memory systems may have evolved to help us remember fitness-relevant information and showed that retention of words rated for their relevance to survival is superior to that of words encoded under other deep processing conditions. The authors present 4 experiments that uncover the proximate mechanisms likely responsible. The authors obtained a recall advantage for survival processing compared with conditions that promoted only item-specific processing or only relational processing. This effect was eliminated when control conditions encouraged both item-specific and relational processing. Data from separate measures of item-specific and relational processing generally were consistent with the view that the memorial advantage for survival processing results from the encoding of both types of processing. Although the present study suggests the proximate mechanisms for the effect, the authors argue that survival processing may be fundamentally different from other memory phenomena for which item-specific and relational processing differences have been implicated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

The temporal orientation of memory: It's time for a change of direction.

“…For example, Nairne's (2005Nairne's ( , 2010 advocacy of memory as a system evolved to enhance survival (clearly a future-oriented enterprise; e.g., Klein et al, 2011) has resulted in a highly active program of research exploring the effects of encoding conditions (survival versus non-survival) on measures of retention (e.g., Burns, Hwang, & Burns, 2011;Butler, Kang, & Roediger, 2009;Kang, McDermott, & Cohen, 2008;Klein, 2012;Klein, Lax, et al, 2010;Klein, Robertson, et al, 2010, Klein et al, 2011Kroneisen & Erdfelder, 2011;Nairne & Pandeirada, 2008;Nairne, Pandeirada, Gregory, & Van Arsdall, 2009;Otgaar, Smeets, & van Bergen, 2010;Soderstorm & McCabe, 2011;Weinstein, Bugg, & Roediger, 2008; for recent reviews, see Howe & Otgaar, 2013;Klein, in press). Another approach to memory that emphasizes its futureoriented aspects is that of memory in its prospective capacities (for review, see Brandimonte, Einstein, & McDaniel, 1996).…”

The effect of long-term working memory through personalization applied to free recall: Uncurbing the primacy-effect enthusiasm

“…This seems likely, knowing the crucial role played by "organization" in mnemonic phenomena (e.g., Bellezza, Cheesman, & Reddy, 1977;Craik, 1979;Pressley et al, 1992;Shing, Werkle-Bergner, Li, & Lindenberger, 2008). More specifically, organization (i.e., the encoding of relationships between list items) and elaboration (i.e., the encoding of individual characteristics) seem to play a crucial role in the increase of mnemonic efficiency when they are combined (e.g., Burns, Burns, & Hwang, 2011;Einstein & Hunt, 1980;Hunt & Einstein, 1981;Klein & Loftus, 1988).…”

Fit to last: Exploring the longevity of the survival processing effect

“…Following these findings, there has been a surge of interest in adaptive memory. Research appears to show consistently that survival processing is a more effective encoding task than other types of semantic processing paradigms, including imagery and selfreference (Kang, McDermott & Cohen, 2008;Nairne, Pandeirada & Thompson, 2008;Nairne, Pandeirada, Gregory & Van Arsdall, 2009;Burns, Burns & Hwang, 2011;Otgaar et al, 2011;Soderstrom & McCabe, 2011;Seamon et al, 2012;Bröder, Krüger & Schütte, 2011;Klein, 2012;Nairne, VanArsdall, Pandeirada & Blunt, 2012;Nouchi & Kawashima, 2012;Howe & Otgaar, 2013;Pandeirada, Pinho & Faria, 2014; but for exceptions, see Butler, Kang & Roedier, 2009;Klein, Robertson & Delton, 2010;Klein, Robertson & Delton, 2011). All in all, it has been suggested that survival processing may be "the 'best of the best' of known encoding procedures" (Nairne, Pandeirada & Thompson, 2008, p. 180).…”