Recognizing what matters: Value improves recognition by selectively enhancing recollection

Abstract

We examined the effects of value on recognition by assessing its contribution to recollection and familiarity. In three experiments, participants studied English words, each associated with a point-value they would earn for correct recognition, with the goal of maximizing their score. In Experiment 1, participants provided Remember/Know judgments. In Experiment 2 participants indicated whether items were recollected or if not, their degree of familiarity along a 6-point scale. In Experiment 3, recognition of words was accompanied by a test of memory for incidental details. Across all experiments, participants were more likely to recognize items with higher point-value. Furthermore, value appeared to primarily enhance recollection, as effects on familiarity were small and not consistent across experiments. Recollection of high-value items appears to be accompanied by fewer incidental details, suggesting that value increases focus on items at the expense of irrelevant information.

Forget me not: Encoding processes in value-directed remembering

“…FORGET ME NOT 34 One difference between the current study and much of previous work showing activation of the midbrain dopamine system is that these previous effects were mainly apparent after a delay of at least 12 hours, suggesting that the effect of dopamine is to enhance memory consolidation (Bethus, Tse, & Morris, 2010;Rossato et al, 2009;Spaniol, Schain, & Bowen, 2013). In the present study, small effects of value were seen on a recognition test that occurred shortly after study, and these immediate effects of value have been observed in previous research (Hennessee, Castel, & Knowlton, 2017;Hennessee, Knowlton, & Castel, 2018). In the current study, we used a fairly sensitive measure of recognition, and thus it is possible that we were able to detect relatively subtle value effects on memory strength.…”

“…In support of the idea that participants engage in more semantic encoding strategies for high-value items, instructing participants to encode all learned items using a mental imagery strategy improved memory for low-value items to the point that value-based differences in sensitivity were reduced and differences in the rates of highest confidence response and Remember responses were eliminated. In a recent study, item-value was associated with increased experiences of recollection but the frequency of high confidence responses was not significantly affected by value (Hennessee, Castel, & Knowlton, 2017). The current findings suggest that value can alter the frequency of these high confidence responses and that mental imagery during encoding may increase both confidence and recollection similarly at test.…”

“…We hypothesized FORGET ME NOT 18 that if differences in recognition accuracy between high-and low-value items were due in part to differences in the depth of encoding, instructing participants to encode all learned items with an elaborative mental imagery strategy would mitigate these differences. Our previous work has shown that high-value items are more likely to be recollected at test (Hennessee, Castel, & Knowlton, 2017;Hennessee, Knowlton, & Castel, 2018). Thus, if participants were achieving superior recollection of high-value items because of differential use of elaborative encoding strategies, we predicted that instructing participants to use a mental imagery strategy for all learned items would reduce this difference in recollection.…”

Valence, arousal, familiarity, concreteness, and imageability ratings for 292 two-character Chinese nouns in Cantonese speakers in Hong Kong

“…Seven separate analyses were conducted, using varying sample sizes of 120, 140, 160, 180, 200, 220, and 240 words. These sample sizes were chosen because they are representative of the number of stimuli typically required for small-scale memory experiments [e.g., Experiment 1 in Hennessee et al [67] presented 180 words in total; Hoppstädter et al [68,69] presented 200 words and 100 words in their studies respectively; Ozubko et al [70] presented 120 words in total]. Each sample was split into two sets and compared against each other (instead of splitting into three or more sets) because admittedly, the database has only 292 words and is unlikely to have enough stimuli for more complex experimental designs.…”

Divided Attention Selectively Impairs Value-Directed Encoding

“…The value-driven gain in recognition was between pooled "remember" and high confidence "know" responses, whereas pooled low confidence responses showed no effect of value. The result that value preferentially affects strongest memories (or recollection) has been repeated in both incidental (Wittmann et al, 2005) and intentional encoding paradigms (Gruber & Otten, 2010;Wolosin, Zeithamova, & Preston, 2012;Cohen et al, 2017;Hennessee, Castel, & Knowlton, 2017), and also for encoded stimuli where, rather than earning reward for correct recognition judgments, a punishment is avoided (Shigemune, Tsukiura, Kambara, & Kawashima, 2014). These studies suggest that the value establishes an encoding context that selectively enhances strong recollective memories, with no consistent effect on weaker memories.…”