Bilingualism Influences How Articulation Enhances Verbal Encoding.

Learning information may benefit from movement: Items that are spoken aloud are more accurately remembered than items that are silently read (the production effect). Candidate mechanisms for this phenomenon suggest that speaking may enrich or improve the feature content of memory traces, yet research suggests that prior language skill also plays a role. Recent work showed a larger production effect in bilinguals for words in their second language (L2) compared to their first language (L1), potentially suggesting that bilinguals engage different or additional linguistic features when speaking L2 compared to L1 words. The current study examined whether the increased L2 production effect reduces for L2 and L1 pseudowords, which may similarly engage mainly phonological features. German (L1)-English (L2) bilinguals first read (out loud or silently) and subsequently recognized German or English words or pseudowords following German or English phonology. The production effect increased for L2 compared to L1 items and for words compared to pseudowords. Modest evidence suggested L2-L1 similarity in production effect scores for pseudowords, but different L2-L1 scores for words. Integrating feature models of memory with models of bilingual language production, we propose that speaking an L2 may engage more extensive and diverse linguistic features than an L1.

The Interaction Between the Production Effect and Serial Position in Recognition and Recall.

In memory tasks, items read aloud are better remembered than their silently read counterparts. This production effect is often interpreted by assuming a distinctiveness benefit for produced items, but whether this benefit also comes at a cost remains up for debate. In recall tasks, when pure lists are used in which all items are produced or read silently, studies have shown a better recall of produced items at the last serial positions, but a lower recall at the first positions. This cost of production has been interpreted by assuming that production interferes with rehearsal. However, in recognition tasks, models typically assume that the distinctiveness benefit for produced items comes at no cost. Across four experiments, participants completed a 2AFC recognition test, an old-new recognition test or an immediate serial recall test. List length was also manipulated. Results show that although the production effect is larger at the last serial positions, the cross-over interaction between the production effect and serial position observed in recall was not present in recognition. These results suggest that task-related differences in the production effect may inform us about the modulation of basic memory processes by task demands.

It's All About That Case.

Prior evidence has indicated that the act of producing a word aloud is more effortful than reading a word silently, and this effort is related to the subsequent memory advantage for produced words. In the current study, we further examined the contributions of reading effort to the overall production effect by making silent reading more effortful. To do this, participants studied words that were presented in standard lowercase font format and words that were presented in an aLtErNaTiNg CaSe font format (which should be more effortful to read). Half of the words in each font condition were read aloud, and half were read silently. Participants completed an old/new recognition test. Experiment 1 was conducted online; Experiment 2 was conducted in-lab and recorded reading times at study to confirm that alternating case font slows reading. In both experiments, we found a production effect in recognition that was uninfluenced by font type. We also found that alternating case font selectively increased recollection (but not familiarity) relative to lowercase font. Thus, the additional time to read words in a disfluent font does not appear to interact with memory benefit of producing words aloud.

A Feature-Space Theory of the Production Effect in Recognition.

Mathematical models explaining production effects assume that production leads to the encoding of additional features, such as phonological ones. This improves memory with a combination of encoding strength and feature distinctiveness, implementing aspects of propositional theories. However, it is not clear why production differs from other manipulations such as study time and spaced repetition, which are also thought to influence strength. Here we extend attentional subsetting theory and propose an explanation based on the dimensionality of feature spaces. Specifically, we suggest phonological features are drawn from a compact feature space. Deeper features are sparsely subselected from a larger subspace. Algebraic and numerical solutions shed light on several findings, including the dependency of production effects on how other list items are encoded (differing from other strength factors) and the production advantage even for homophones. This places production within a continuum of strength-like manipulations that differ in terms of the feature subspaces they operate upon and leads to novel predictions based on direct manipulations of feature-space properties.

The Production Effect Becomes Spatial.

In the verbal domain, it is well established that words read aloud are better remembered than their silently read counterparts. It has been hypothesized that this production effect stems from the addition of distinctive features, with the caveat that the processing that generates added features interferes with rehearsal. Here, we tested the idea that a similar trade-off is found in the visuospatial domain. In all experiments, a short series of single dots sequentially appeared at various locations on a screen. Participants produced the items by clicking on them at presentation, watched the items appear quietly, or produced an irrelevant click after each item to better even out rehearsal opportunities between produced and control conditions. In Experiment 1, the dots appeared within a visible grid and an order reconstruction task was used. Experiment 2 also called upon reconstruction, but with the grid removed. In Experiments 3, a recall task was used. The results show that producing items hindered performance compared to the control condition. Conversely, production improved performance compared to the control condition where rehearsal was hindered. This is the first demonstration of a visuospatial production effect. The key findings were successfully modeled by the Revised Feature Model (RFM).

Exploring the Production Effect in Memory Reveals a Balanced Bilingual Advantage.

There is evidence suggesting that bilingual individuals demonstrate an advantage over monolinguals in performing various tasks related to memory and executive functions. The characteristics of this bilingual advantage are not unanimously agreed upon in the literature, and some even doubt it exists. The heterogeneity of the bilingual population may explain this inconsistency. Hence, it is important to identify different subgroups of bilinguals and characterize their cognitive performance. The current study focuses on the production effect, a well-established memory phenomenon, in bilingual young adults differing in their English and Hebrew proficiency levels, and the possible balanced bilingual advantage. The aims of this study are (1) to evaluate the production effect in three groups of bilingual participants: English-dominant bilinguals, Hebrew-dominant bilinguals, and balanced bilinguals, and (2) to examine whether memory advantage depends on varying degrees of bilingualism. One hundred twenty-one bilingual young adults who speak English and Hebrew at different levels participated. All learned lists of familiar words, in English and Hebrew, half by reading aloud and half by silent reading, followed by free recall tests. As expected, a production effect (better memory for aloud words than for silent words) was found for all groups in both languages. Balanced bilinguals remembered more words than did dominant participants, demonstrating a memory advantage in both languages. These findings support the hypothesis that the presence of cognitive advantage in bilingualism depends on the acquisition of a good proficiency level in each of the languages, with direct implications for family language policy and bilingual education.

Production benefits on encoding are modulated by language experience: Less experience may help.

Several lines of research have shown that performing movements while learning new information aids later retention of that information, compared to learning by perception alone. For instance, articulated words are more accurately remembered than words that are silently read (the production effect). A candidate mechanism for this movement-enhanced encoding, sensorimotor prediction, assumes that acquired sensorimotor associations enable movements to prime associated percepts and hence improve encoding. Yet it is still unknown how the extent of prior sensorimotor experience influences the benefits of movement on encoding. The current study addressed this question by examining whether the production effect is modified by prior language experience. Does the production effect reduce or persist in a second language (L2) compared to a first language (L1)? Two groups of unbalanced bilinguals, German (L1) - English (L2) bilinguals (Experiment 1) and English (L1) - German (L2) bilinguals (Experiment 2), learned lists of German and English words by reading the words silently or reading the words aloud, and they subsequently performed recognition tests. Both groups showed a pronounced production effect (higher recognition accuracy for spoken compared to silently read words) in the first and second languages. Surprisingly, the production effect was greater in the second languages compared to the first languages, across both bilingual groups. We discuss interpretations based on increased phonological encoding, increased effort or attention, or both, when reading aloud in a second language.

Productions Need Not Match Study Items to Confer a Production Advantage, But It Helps.

The production effect is the finding that, relative to silent reading, producing information at study (e.g., reading aloud) leads to a benefit in memory. In most studies of this effect, individuals are presented with a set of unique items, and they produce a subset of these items (e.g., they are presented with the to-be-remembered target item TABLE and produce table) such that the production is both unique and representative of the target. Across two preregistered experiments, we examined the influence of a production that is unique but that does not match the target (e.g., producing fence to the target TABLE, producing car to the target TREE, and so on). This kind of production also yielded a significant effect-the mismatching production effect-although it was smaller than the standard production effect (i.e., when productions are both unique and representative of their targets) and was detectable only when targets with standard productions were included in the same study phase (i.e., when the type of production was manipulated within participant). We suggest that target-production matching is an important precursor to the production effect and that the kind of production that brings about a benefit depends on the other productions that are present.

Give me enough time to rehearse: presentation rate modulates the production effect.

This paper uses the production effect to test one of the important predictions of a view of memory that is embodied in the Revised Feature Model (RFM). When to-be-recalled lists contain items both read aloud and silently, words read aloud are less well recalled at the beginning of the list and better recalled at the end. According to the RFM, producing the items by reading them aloud adds distinctive features which supports recall, but production also interferes with rehearsal - a process that operates more significantly at the start of a list. This critical role assigned to rehearsal has never been systematically tested. We do this here through a systematic literature review and an experiment that manipulates presentation rate. With a faster presentation rate, rehearsal is less likely; the implication is that the advantage observed for silently read items in the primacy positions should vanish, while the recency advantage for produced items should remain. The systematic review collected an initial sample of 422 unique articles on the production effect in immediate serial recall and revealed the predicted pattern. In addition, in our experiment, the presentation rate was manipulated within an immediate serial recall task (500, 1,000, and 2,000 ms/word). As predicted, the recency advantage for produced items was observed for all presentation speeds. Critically, the production disadvantage for early serial positions was only present for the two slowest rates, but not at the fastest speed. Results were successfully modeled by calling upon the RFM.

Did I text you? The influence of the mode of transmission on destination memory.

In a society where people often communicate through digital technology, it is crucial to investigate whether the transmission mode influences destination memory performance (our capacity to remember to whom we transmitted certain information). In Experiment 1, we asked young adults (N = 31) to share of a set of familiar proverbs only by typing and the rest by both typing and saying them aloud. Better destination memory was observed when the information was transmitted by the two means (aloud and typing). Did this better performance occur because participants shared the information aloud or because the information was transmitted by two means? In Experiment 2, young adults (N = 34) shared familiar proverbs aloud, by typing, or simultaneously aloud and by typing. Results showed that transmission aloud led to a better destination memory than typing, and no further improvement occurred when the transmission was both aloud and by typing. Additionally, no differences were observed regarding item memory, supporting the idea that item and destination memories are two different types of memory.

Reading text aloud benefits memory but not comprehension.

The production effect-that reading aloud leads to better memory than does reading silently-has been defined narrowly with reference to memory; it has been explored largely using word lists as the material to be read and remembered. But might the benefit of production extend beyond memory and beyond individual words? In a series of four experiments, passages from reading comprehension tests served as the study material. Participants read some passages aloud and others silently. After each passage, they completed multiple-choice questions about that passage. Separating the multiple-choice questions into memory-focused versus comprehension-focused questions, we observed a consistent production benefit only for the memory-focused questions. Production clearly improves memory for text, not just for individual words, and also extends to multiple-choice testing. The overall pattern of findings fits with the distinctiveness account of production-that information read aloud stands out at study and at test from information read silently. Only when the tested information is a very close match to the studied information, as is the case for memory questions but not for comprehension questions, does production improve accuracy.

The prod eff: Partially producing items moderates the production effect.

Current accounts of the production effect suggest that production leads to the encoding of additional production-associated features and/or better feature encoding. Thus, if it is the act of production that leads to the storage and/or enhanced encoding of these features, then less of this act should reduce the resulting production effect. In two experiments, we provide a direct test of this idea by manipulating how much of a given item is produced within a single mode of production (typing). Results demonstrate that such partial production can yield a significant production effect that is smaller than the effect that emerges from producing the entire item. These results suggest that how much of an item is produced can moderate the size of the production effect and are considered in the context of recent modelling efforts.

Neural representation of a one-week delay in remembering information after production and self-generated elaboration encoding strategy.

Many studies have confirmed the memory enhancement effect of production, generation and elaboration which can be effective after only one encoding. It is also known that greater memory enhancement effects can be obtained by combining multiple memory strategies during encoding. This study aimed to investigate whether the combination of production and self-generated elaboration enhances memory performance compared with production or generation alone. A total of 23 undergraduate and graduate students participated in this study. In the functional magnetic resonance imaging analysis, we explored the neural representation of remembering information after production and self-generated elaboration strategy. We set four encoding strategy conditions: (1) Read Silent (read without production), (2) Read Aloud (only production), (3) Add Silent (self-generated elaboration without production), (4) Add Aloud (production and self-generated elaboration). The retrieval performance and brain activity while retrieving the learned sentences after a one-week delay were examined. The behavioral results showed that the highest memory performance was for sentences encoded in Add Aloud. The interaction between production and self-generated elaboration was statistically significant. These results suggest that the memory enhancement effect of combining production and self-generated elaboration is not a simple addition nor synergistic facilitation effect. The imaging results showed that the following areas were related to the retrieval of the target encoded in the add aloud condition: the area related to integration of internal and external information (precuneus), area related to information rich stimuli (lateral occipital lobe), area related to self-involvement and inference of others' feelings (MPFC), area related to seen imagery (retrosplenial region) and area related to adjustment of movement (cerebellum). These results suggest that with an encoding strategy that combines production and self-generated elaboration, integrated auditory input of vocalizations and generated images, visual images of the scene, self-relevance, inference of other's feeling, movement by moving mouth are stored with the target and enhanced memory performance of AA.

EEG-based univariate and multivariate analyses reveal that multiple processes contribute to the production effect in recognition.

The production effect (PE) is the finding that reading words aloud rather than silently during study leads to improved memory. We used electroencephalography (EEG) techniques to detect the contributions of recollection, familiarity, and attentional processes to the PE in recognition memory, using Chinese stimuli. During the study phase, participants encoded each list item aloud, silently, or by performing a non-unique aloud (control) task. During the test phase, they made remember/know/new recognition judgments. We recorded EEG data in both phases. The behavioral results replicated the typical pattern with English stimuli: Recognition was better in the aloud condition than in the silent (and control) condition, and this PE was due to enhanced recollection and familiarity. At study, the amplitude of the P3b ERP component was greater in the aloud than in the silent/control conditions, suggesting that reading aloud increases attention or preparatory processing during the intention phase. At test, the recollection-based LPC old/new effect was largest in the aloud condition; however, the familiarity-based FN400 old/new effect was equivalent between the aloud condition and the silent/control conditions. Only the LPC effect correlated with the behavioral effect. Moreover, multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) showed that accurate classification of items as 'aloud' versus 'new' mainly occurred in the later period of the recognition response, consistent with the LPC old/new effect. Our findings suggest that the within-subject PE in recognition memory reflects enhanced attention and distinctiveness, rather than increased memory strength. More broadly, our findings suggest that encoding strategies such as production enhance recollection more than familiarity.

Actions do not clearly impact auditory memory.

When memorizing a list of words, those that are read aloud are remembered better than those read silently, a phenomenon known as the production effect. There have been several attempts to understand the production effect, however, actions alone have not been examined as possible contributors. Stimuli that coincide with our own actions are processed differently compared to stimuli presented passively to us. These sensory response modulations may have an impact on how action-revolving inputs are stored in memory. In this study, we investigated whether actions could impact auditory memory. Participants listened to sounds presented either during or in between their actions. We measured electrophysiological responses to the sounds and tested participants' memory of them. Results showed attenuation of sensory responses for action-coinciding sounds. However, we did not find a significant effect on memory performance. The absence of significant behavioral findings suggests that the production effect may be not dependent on the effects of actions per se. We conclude that action alone is not sufficient to improve memory performance, and thus elicit a production effect.

Characterizing production: the production effect is eliminated for unusual voices unless they are frequent at study.

The production effect refers to the finding that items read aloud are better remembered than items read silently. This is often explained with reference to distinctiveness, arguing that aloud items become associated with distinctive sensorimotor features that facilitate retrieval at test. Based on this framework, more distinctive forms of production should result in larger production effects. The present study tested this theory by having participants study items silently or aloud in either their own voice or as a popular character. Participants were then tested for those items using recognition memory. Relative to silent items, aloud items read in the participants' own voice demonstrated a typical production effect; however, contrary to any predictions, no production effect was observed for the character voices. We next manipulated how frequently the character voice was used relative to the participants' own voice. This revealed a production effect for character voices only when those voices were more common than the participant's own voice. This pattern could not be attributed to cognitive demands or performance anxiety but was predicted by a novel computational account based on the Retrieving Effectively from Memory (REM) model. Our results show that the relation between distinctiveness and memory is not necessarily linear.

Production can enhance semantic encoding: Evidence from forced-choice recognition with homophone versus synonym lures.

The production effect-better memory for words read aloud rather than silently-has been attributed to responses at test being guided by memory for the act of production. In Experiment 1, we evaluated this distinctiveness account by comparing production effects in forced-choice recognition when lures were either homophones of the targets (toad or towed?) or unrelated words (toad or seam?). If the production effect at test was driven solely by memory for the productive act (e.g., articulation, auditory processing), then the effect should be reduced with homophone lures. Contrary to that prediction, the production effect did not differ credibly between homophone-lure and unrelated-lure groups. Experiment 1 led us to hypothesize that production may also boost semantic encoding, and that participants use memory of semantic encoding to guide their forced-choice responses. Consistent with these hypotheses, using synonym lures to interfere with semantic-based decisions (poison or venom?) reduced the production effect relative to using unrelated lures (poison or ethics?) in Experiment 2. Our findings suggest that enhanced conceptual encoding may be another useful product of production.

The production effect is consistent over material variations: support for the distinctiveness account.

The production effect is the superior memory for items read aloud as opposed to silently at the time of study. The distinctiveness account holds that produced items benefit from the encoding of additional elements associated with the act of production. If so, then that benefit should be consistent regardless of item type. Three experiments, using three different sets of materials and three different methods, tested this hypothesis. Experiment 1, using recognition testing, showed consistent production benefits for high and low frequency words. Experiment 2, using free recall, showed consistent production increments for pictures and words. Experiment 3, using incidental learning, showed consistent production benefits for recognition of nonwords and words. Taken together, these results fit with the distinctiveness account: Production at encoding dependably adds information to the memory record, regardless of item type or method of testing, producing a consistently reliable memory benefit.

The Production Effect Interacts With Serial Positions.

Reading some words aloud during presentation, that is, producing them, and reading other words silently generate a large memory advantage for words that are produced. This robust within-list production effect is in contrast with the between-lists condition in which all words are read aloud or silently. In a between-lists condition, produced items are better recognized, but not better recalled. The lack of a between-lists production effect with recall tasks has often been presented as one of its defining characteristics and as a benchmark for evaluating models. Recently, Cyr et al. (2021) showed that this occurs because item production interacts with serial positions: Produced items are less well recalled on the first serial positions than silently read items, while the reverse pattern is observed for the recency portion of the curve. However, this pattern was observed with a repeated-measures design, and it may be a by-product of compensatory processes under the control of participants. Here, using a between-participants design, we observed the predicted interaction between production and serial positions. The results further support the Revised Feature Model (RFM) suggesting that produced items are encoded with more modality-dependent distinctive features, therefore benefiting recall. However, the production of the additional distinctive features would disrupt rehearsal.

Multiple producible cues do not aid face-name memory: A reverse production effect.

Are there effective mechanisms that can be used to remember someone's name? The production effect is a phenomenon that exemplifies memory's robust benefit for studied words or phrases that have been spoken out loud, as opposed to only hearing or seeing them. However, this robust effect has not yet been identified for face-name pairings. The present study seeks to examine the boundary conditions of the production effect in face-name pairings by incorporating the additional cue of valenced adjectives. Participants were presented with facial images and a sentence stating the name and a description of the individual. Sentences were learned in one of four ways: saying the sentence out loud, reading it silently, reading it while hearing it, or only listening to the sentence presented while viewing the face. Memory for the face, name, and adjective combinations were tested using various types of cues: face only (Experiment 1a), or face and name or adjective (Experiment 1b & Experiment 2). Results replicate the lack of a production effect for face-name memory, and instead support a reverse effect for such stimuli. These findings indicate the unique processing of faces and highlight boundary conditions of the production effect.