Realistic context doesn't amplify the survival processing effect: Lessons learned from Covid-19 scenarios

Kroneisen, Meike; Kriechbaumer, Michael; Kamp, Siri-Maria; Erdfelder, Edgar

doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103459

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

“…2). In general, the survival advantage is largest for items receiving the lowest relevance ratings; it tends to decrease with increasing ratings and to vanish for the highest rating, but never becomes significantly negative, again replicating previous results (e.g., Kroneisen et al, 2013Kroneisen et al, , 2014Kroneisen et al, , 2016Kroneisen et al, , 2021Kroneisen et al, , 2022. 5 Regarding the key hypothesis of this study, the significant difference of relevance rating RT1s (Task 1) between the survival and the moving scenario was obtained in the tone classification task RT2s (Task 2) as well, and it was of the same size at the short SOA.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…This pattern replicates similar results we found in previous research (cf. Kroneisen & Erdfelder, 2011;Kroneisen et al, 2013Kroneisen et al, , 2014Kroneisen et al, , 2016Kroneisen et al, , 2021Kroneisen et al, , 2022.…”

Section: Recall Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…3; Nairne et al, 2019 ) or choice of the most useful object for a scenario (Coverdale et al, 2019 ; Forester et al, 2020b ). Third, replacing the moving control scenario by more exciting control scenarios does not eliminate the survival processing advantage (Bell et al, 2013 ; Kang et al, 2008 ; Kroneisen et al, 2022 ; Otgaar et al, 2011 ). Fourth, survival processing has been shown to outperform established memory-enhancing encoding techniques such as intentional learning, item generation from cues, self-reference ratings, or visual imagery (Kroneisen et al, 2013 ; Nairne et al, 2008 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These ideas may later serve as powerful retrieval cues in the free recall test. By contrast, shifting encoding processes away from thoughts about possible object functions or even suppressing such thoughts reduces the survival processing effect (Bell et al, 2015 ; Kroneisen & Erdfelder, 2011 ; Kroneisen et al, 2013 , 2021 , 2022 ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Survival processing occupies the central bottleneck of cognitive processing: A psychological refractory period analysis

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Words judged for relevance in a survival situation are remembered better than words judged for relevance in a nonsurvival context. This survival processing effect has been explained by selective tuning of human memory during evolution to process and retain information specifically relevant for survival. According to the richness-of-encoding hypothesis the survival processing effect arises from a domain-general mechanism—namely, a particularly rich and distinct form of encoding. This form of information processing is effortful and requires limited cognitive capacities. In our experiment, we used the well-established psychological refractory period framework in conjunction with the effect propagation logic to assess the role of central cognitive resources for the survival processing effect. Our data demonstrate that the survival memory advantage indeed relies on the capacity-limited central stage of cognitive processing. Thus, rating words in the context of a survival scenario involves central processing resources to a greater amount than rating words in a nonsurvival control condition. We discuss implications for theories of the survival processing effect.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Recall Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Survival processing occupies the central bottleneck of cognitive processing: A psychological refractory period analysis

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Ratings of survival-related dimensions for a set of 732 words, their relationships with other psycholinguistic variables and memory performance

Bonin¹,

Thiebaut²,

Méot³

2023

Curr Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Survival Processing Occupies the Central Bottleneck of Cognitive Processing: A Psychological Refractory Period Analysis

Kroneisen¹,

Erdfelder²,

Groß³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Words judged for relevance in a survival situation are remembered better than words judged for relevance in a non-survival context. This survival processing effect has been explained by selective tuning of human memory during evolution to process and retain information specifically relevant for survival. According to the richness-of-encoding hypothesis, however, the survival processing effect arises from a domain-general mechanism, namely, a particularly rich and distinct form of encoding. This form of information processing is effortful and requires limited cognitive capacities. In our experiment, we used the well-established psychological refractory period framework in conjunction with the effect propagation logic to assess the role of central cognitive resources for the survival processing effect. Our data demonstrate that the survival memory advantage indeed relies on the capacity-limited central stage of cognitive processing. Thus, rating words in the context of a survival scenario involves central processing resources to a greater amount than rating words in a non-survival control condition. We discuss implications for theories of the survival processing effect.

show abstract

Realistic context doesn't amplify the survival processing effect: Lessons learned from Covid-19 scenarios

Cited by 3 publications

References 33 publications

Survival processing occupies the central bottleneck of cognitive processing: A psychological refractory period analysis

Survival processing occupies the central bottleneck of cognitive processing: A psychological refractory period analysis

Ratings of survival-related dimensions for a set of 732 words, their relationships with other psycholinguistic variables and memory performance

Survival Processing Occupies the Central Bottleneck of Cognitive Processing: A Psychological Refractory Period Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About