Normative data for Chinese-English paired associates.

Paired-associate learning is one of the most commonly used paradigms to study human memory. In many of these studies, participants are typically told to learn foreign language-English translations, such as Swahili-English or Lithuanian-English pairs. One limitation of these currently available foreign language-English translation norms is that their foreign languages are based on the alphabetic writing system, thereby preventing researchers from generalizing their findings to languages based on logographic writing systems. In the present study we collected normative data for 160 Chinese-English word pairs. Participants completed three study-test cycles, followed by metacognitive judgments on their learning experience. For each pair, we report recall performance, recall latency, ease of learning, and judgments of learning. A simultaneous multiple regression analysis with frequency (of both the English word and the Chinese character), word length (English), and number of strokes (Chinese) as predictors revealed that a greater number of strokes (or higher visual complexity) for the Chinese characters predicted lower target recall.

The roles of encoding strategies and retrieval practice in test-expectancy effects.

We investigated whether expectations for different kinds of memory tests induce qualitatively different encoding strategies. In Experiment 1, participants studied four lists of words and after each list completed a cued-recall test that contained either all semantic or all orthographic cues so as to build up an expectancy for receiving the same type of test for the fifth critical study list. To rule out that the test-expectancy effects in Experiment 1 were due to differences in retrieval practice, in Experiment 2, participants received three practice tests each for both cue-types. Participants' test expectancy for all lists was induced by telling them before each list the type of cue they would receive for the upcoming study list. In both experiments, the critical test contained both expected and unexpected cues. In Experiment 1, participants who expected semantic cues had better recall to the semantic cues than to the orthographic cues and vice versa for those who expected orthographic cues. However, in Experiment 2, there was no effect of test expectancy. These findings suggest that the test-expectancy effects in Experiment 1 were due to more retrieval practice on the expected than unexpected tests rather than to qualitatively different test-expectancy-induced encoding strategies.

Transfer-appropriate processing in the testing effect.

The testing effect is the finding that taking a review test enhances performance on a final test relative to restudying the material. The present experiment investigated transfer-appropriate processing in the testing effect using semantic and orthographic cues to evoke conceptual and data-driven processing, respectively. After a study phase, subjects either restudied the material or took a cued-recall test consisting of half semantic and half orthographic cues in which the correct response was given as feedback. A final, cued-recall test consisted of the identical cue, or a new cue that was of the same type or different type of cue (semantic/orthographic or orthographic/semantic) as that used for that target in the review test. Testing enhanced memory in all conditions. When the review cues and final-test cues were identical, final recall was higher for semantic than orthographic cues. Consistent with test-based transfer-appropriate processing, memory performance improved as the review and final cues became more similar. These results suggest that the testing effect could potentially be caused by the episodic retrieval processes in a final memory test overlapping more with the episodic retrieval processes in a review test than with the encoding operations performed during restudy.

Sleep loss and emotion: A systematic review and meta-analysis of over 50 years of experimental research.

In a largely sleep-deprived society, quantifying the effects of sleep loss on emotion is critical for promoting psychological health. This preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis quantified the effects of various forms of sleep loss on multiple aspects of emotional experiences. Eligible studies used experimental reductions of sleep via total sleep deprivation, partial sleep restriction, or sleep fragmentation in healthy populations to examine effects on positive affect, negative affect, general mood disturbances, emotional reactivity, anxiety symptoms, and/or depressive symptoms. In total, 1,338 effect sizes across 154 studies were included (N = 5,717; participant age range = 7-79 years). Random effects models were conducted, and all forms of sleep loss resulted in reduced positive affect (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.27 to -1.14), increased anxiety symptoms (SMD = 0.57-0.63), and blunted arousal in response to emotional stimuli (SMD = -0.20 to -0.53). Findings for negative affect, reports of emotional valence in response to emotional stimuli, and depressive symptoms were mixed and depended on the type of sleep loss. Nonlinear effects for the amount of sleep loss as well as differences based on the stage of sleep restricted (i.e., rapid eye movement sleep or slow-wave sleep) were also detected. This study represents the most comprehensive quantitative synthesis of experimental sleep and emotion research to date and provides strong evidence that periods of extended wakefulness, shortened sleep duration, and/or nighttime awakenings adversely influence human emotional functioning. Findings provide an integrative foundation for future research on sleep and emotion and elucidate the precise ways that inadequate sleep may impact our daytime emotional lives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Citation rates for experimental psychology articles published between 1950 and 2004: top-cited articles in behavioral cognitive psychology.

From citation rates for over 85,000 articles published between 1950 and 2004 in 56 psychology journals, we identified a total of 500 behavioral cognitive psychology articles that ranked in the top 0.6% in each half-decade, in terms of their mean citations per year using the Web of Science. Thirty nine percent [corrected] of these articles were produced by 78 authors who authored three or more of them, and more than half were published by only five journals.The mean number of cites per year and the total number of citations necessary for an article to achieve various percentile rankings are reported for each journal. The mean number of citations necessary for an article published within each half-decade to rank at any given percentile has steadily increased from 1950 to 2004. Of the articles that we surveyed, 11% had zero total citations, and 35% received fewer than four total citations. Citations for post-1994 articles ranking in the 50th-75th and 90th-95th percentiles have generally continued to grow across each of their 3-year postpublication bins. For pre-1995 articles ranking in the 50th-75th and 90th-95th percentiles, citations peaked in the 4- to 6- or 7- to 9-year postpublication bins and decreased linearly thereafter, until asymptoting. In contrast, for the top-500 articles, (a) for pre-1980 articles, citations grew and peaked 10-18-year postpublication bins, and after a slight decrease began to linearly increase again; (b) for post-1979 articles, citations have continually increased across years in a nearly linear fashion. We also report changes in topics covered by the top-cited articles over the decades.

Survival Processing Enhances Visual Search Efficiency.

Words rated for their survival relevance are remembered better than when rated using other well-known memory mnemonics. This finding, which is known as the survival advantage effect and has been replicated in many studies, suggests that our memory systems are molded by natural selection pressures. In two experiments, the present study used a visual search task to examine whether there is likewise a survival advantage for our visual systems. Participants rated words for their survival relevance or for their pleasantness before locating that object's picture in a search array with 8 or 16 objects. Although there was no difference in search times among the two rating scenarios when set size was 8, survival processing reduced visual search times when set size was 16. These findings reflect a search efficiency effect and suggest that similar to our memory systems, our visual systems are also tuned toward self-preservation.

Testing enhances both encoding and retrieval for both tested and untested items.

In forward testing effects, taking a test enhances memory for subsequently studied material. These effects have been observed for previously studied and tested items, a potentially item-specific testing effect, and newly studied untested items, a purely generalized testing effect. We directly compared item-specific and generalized forward testing effects using procedures to separate testing benefits due to encoding versus retrieval. Participants studied two lists of Swahili-English word pairs, with the second study list containing "new" pairs intermixed with the previously studied "old" pairs. Participants completed a review phase in which they took a cued-recall test on only the "old" pairs or restudied them. In Experiments 1a, 1b, and 2, the review phase was given either before or after the second study list. Testing benefited memory to the same degree for both "new" and "old" pairs, suggesting that there were no pair-specific benefits of testing. The larger benefit from testing when review was given before rather than after the second study list suggests that the memory enhancement was due to both testing-enhanced encoding and testing-enhanced retrieval. To better equate generalized testing effects for "new" and "old" pairs, Experiment 3 intermixed them in the review phase. A statistically significant pair-specific testing effect for "old" items was now observed. Overall, these results show that forward testing effects are due to both testing-enhanced encoding and retrieval effects and that direct, pair-specific forward testing benefits are considerably smaller than indirect, generalized forward testing benefits.

Does testing increase spontaneous mediation in learning semantically related paired associates?

Carpenter (2011) argued that the testing effect she observed for semantically related but associatively unrelated paired associates supports the mediator effectiveness hypothesis. This hypothesis asserts that after the cue-target pair mother-child is learned, relative to restudying mother-child, a review test in which mother is used to cue the recall of child leads to (a) greater activation of the mediator (father), and (b) greater strengthening of the links in the cue-to-mediator (mother-father) and mediator-to-target (father-child) associative chain. This chain is then spontaneously used for recalling child when mother is given as the cue in a final test. The mediator effectiveness hypothesis is supported by the finding that relative to review restudying, mother-child review testing leads to better recall of the target child in the final test when cued by either mother or father. The present Experiment 1 examined an alternative account of this testing effect for mediator-to-target recall. By this account, when given as a cue, the mediator elicits the original cue, which in turn covertly cues the target via a test-strengthened cue-target association. Contrary to this account, the mediator-to-target testing effect did not depend on the preexisting mediator-cue associative strength. Experiment 2 provided a more direct test of the mediator effectiveness hypothesis by having participants recall the mediator and then the target in the final test. Contrary to predictions made by the mediator effectiveness hypothesis, (a) the cue-to-target testing effect was of the same magnitude whether the mediator was recalled or not, and (b) overall target recall was lower, not higher, when participants recalled the mediator. Thus, spontaneous mediation does not underlie the testing effect that occurs for semantically related but associatively unrelated paired associates. (PsycINFO Database Record

I can see what you are saying: Auditory labels reduce visual search times.

The present study explored the self-directed-speech effect, the finding that relative to silent reading of a label (e.g., DOG), saying it aloud reduces visual search reaction times (RTs) for locating a target picture among distractors. Experiment 1 examined whether this effect is due to a confound in the differences in the number of cues in self-directed speech (two) vs. silent reading (one) and tested whether self-articulation is required for the effect. The results showed that self-articulation is not required and that merely hearing the auditory label reduces visual search RTs relative to silent reading. This finding also rules out the number of cues confound. Experiment 2 examined whether hearing an auditory label activates more prototypical features of the label's referent and whether the auditory-label benefit is moderated by the target's imagery concordance (the degree to which the target picture matches the mental picture that is activated by a written label for the target). When the target imagery concordance was high, RTs following the presentation of a high prototypicality picture or auditory cue were comparable and shorter than RTs following a visual label or low prototypicality picture cue. However, when the target imagery concordance was low, RTs following an auditory cue were shorter than the comparable RTs following the picture cues and visual-label cue. The results suggest that an auditory label activates both prototypical and atypical features of a concept and can facilitate visual search RTs even when compared to picture primes.

Mental juggling: when does multitasking impair reading comprehension?

The present study investigated the conditions under which multitasking impairs reading comprehension. Participants read prose passages (the primary task), some of which required them to perform a secondary task. In Experiment 1, we compared two different types of secondary tasks (answering trivia questions and solving math problems). Reading comprehension was assessed using a multiple-choice test that measured both factual and conceptual knowledge. The results showed no observable detrimental effects associated with multitasking. In Experiment 2, the secondary task was a cognitive load task that required participants to remember a string of numbers while reading the passages. Performance on the reading comprehension test was lower in the cognitive load conditions relative to the no-load condition. The present study delineates the conditions under which multitasking can impair or have no effect on reading comprehension. These results further our understanding of our capacity to multitask and have practical implications in our technologically advanced society in which multitasking has become commonplace.

Must analysis of meaning follow analysis of form? A time course analysis.

Many models of word recognition assume that processing proceeds sequentially from analysis of form to analysis of meaning. In the context of morphological processing, this implies that morphemes are processed as units of form prior to any influence of their meanings. Some interpret the apparent absence of differences in recognition latencies to targets (SNEAK) in form and semantically similar (sneaky-SNEAK) and in form similar and semantically dissimilar (sneaker-SNEAK) prime contexts at a stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) of 48 ms as consistent with this claim. To determine the time course over which degree of semantic similarity between morphologically structured primes and their targets influences recognition in the forward masked priming variant of the lexical decision paradigm, we compared facilitation for the same targets after semantically similar and dissimilar primes across a range of SOAs (34-100 ms). The effect of shared semantics on recognition latency increased linearly with SOA when long SOAs were intermixed (Experiments 1A and 1B) and latencies were significantly faster after semantically similar than dissimilar primes at homogeneous SOAs of 48 ms (Experiment 2) and 34 ms (Experiment 3). Results limit the scope of form-then-semantics models of recognition and demonstrate that semantics influences even the very early stages of recognition. Finally, once general performance across trials has been accounted for, we fail to provide evidence for individual differences in morphological processing that can be linked to measures of reading proficiency.

Null category-length and target-lure relatedness effects in episodic recognition: a constraint on item-noise interference models.

There are two main classes of model of interference effects in recognition memory: item-noise and context-noise. Item-noise models predict that a loss of memory discriminability will occur with an increase in the number of studied items from the same taxonomic category (category length, CL) and that forced-choice recognition performance will be higher when the target and lure are related rather than unrelated. Context-noise models, however, predict null effects for both of these manipulations. Although results from some recent experiments suggest that CL and target-lure relatedness have a trivial or no effect on memory discriminability when the related items from the same taxonomic category are "not back to back in the study list but are separated (spaced) by interleaving items from other semantic categories," these experiments have methodological limitations that were eliminated in the present experiment in which exemplars representing category lengths of 2, 8, or 14 were presented spaced apart within the same study list. Recognition was tested using a yes/no recognition test or a two-alternative forced-choice recognition test in which the target and lure were either related or unrelated. In yes/no recognition, d' decreased as CL increased, replicating prior research. However, when the slope of the z-ROC function is less than 1.0, as is typically so and was so in the present results, d' differences can arise due to criterion shifts and are not necessarily due to memory discriminability differences. When the more appropriate measure of memory discriminability, d a , was computed, CL had no effect in yes/no recognition, nor did it have an effect in forced-choice recognition, which also was not affected by target-lure relatedness. Thus, the present results are congruent with context-noise models and pose a challenge for item-noise models.