Brain regions supporting retrieval of words drawn at encoding: fMRI evidence for multimodal reactivation.

Memory for words that are drawn or sketched by the participant, rather than written, during encoding is typically superior. While this drawing benefit has been reliably demonstrated in recent years, there has yet to be an investigation of its neural basis. Here, we asked participants to either create drawings, repeatedly write, or list physical characteristics depicting each target word during encoding. Participants then completed a recognition memory test for target words while undergoing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Behavioural results showed memory was significantly higher for words drawn than written, replicating the typical drawing effect. Memory for words whose physical characteristics were listed at encoding was also higher than for those written repeatedly, but lower than for those drawn. Voxel-wise analyses of fMRI data revealed two distributed sets of brain regions more active for items drawn relative to written, the left angular gyrus (BA 39) and bilateral frontal (BA 10) regions, suggesting integration and self-referential processing during retrieval of drawn words. Brain-behaviour correlation analyses showed that the size of one's memory benefit for words drawn relative to written at encoding was positively correlated with activation in brain regions linked to visual representation and imagery (BA 17 and cuneus) and motor planning (premotor and supplementary motor areas; BA 6). This study suggests that drawing benefits memory by coactivating multiple sensory traces. Target words drawn during encoding are subsequently remembered by re-engaging visual, motoric, and semantic representations.

Release from response interference in color-word contingency learning.

In identifying the print colors of words when some combinations of color and word occur more frequently than others, people quickly show evidence of learning these associations. This contingency learning effect is evident in faster and more accurate responses to high-contingency combinations than to low-contingency combinations. Across four experiments, we systematically varied the number of response-irrelevant word stimuli connected to response-relevant colors. In each experiment, one group experienced the typical contingency learning paradigm with three colors linked to three words; other groups saw more words (six or twelve) linked to the same three colors. All four experiments disconfirmed a central prediction derived from the Parallel Episodic Processing (PEP 2.0) model (Schmidt et al., 2016)-that the magnitude of the contingency learning effect should remain stable as more words are added to the response-irrelevant dimension, as long as the color-word contingency ratios are maintained. Responses to high-contingency items did slow down numerically as the number of words increased between groups, consistent with the prediction from PEP 2.0, but these changes were unreliable. Inconsistent with PEP 2.0, however, overall response time did not slow down and responses to low-contingency items actually sped up as the number of words increased across groups. These findings suggest that the PEP 2.0 model should be modified to incorporate response interference caused by high-probability associations when responding to low-probability combinations.

Face processing in ADHD: A review of the N170 event-related potential.

Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is associated with deficits in social functioning, including peer difficulties and poor relationship quality. Little is known, however, about the integrity of foundational sociocognitive abilities that support interpersonal interactions in ADHD. Face processing-a fundamental component of social cognition-has been a popular topic of recent investigations in this area. Researchers have attempted to delineate face processing mechanisms in ADHD to elucidate social deficits often seen in the disorder. Investigating the N170 event-related potential, a neural marker of face processing, has been a popular approach in this endeavour. Here, we present two accounts that offer competing views of how social deficits might arise in those with ADHD. Next, we systematically review and synthesise the literature on the N170 in ADHD to identify whether atypicalities in sociocognitive domains like face processing occur in this patient population. Gaps in the literature are identified and concrete solutions are offered to improve future research in this area. We end by discussing immediate implications for treatment approaches designed to address widely observed social deficits in individuals with ADHD. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

Symbol superiority: Why $ is better remembered than 'dollar'.

Memory typically is better for information presented in picture format than in word format. Dual-coding theory (Paivio, 1969) proposes that this is because pictures are spontaneously labelled, leading to the creation of two representational codes-image and verbal-whereas words often lead to only a single (verbal) code. With this perspective as motivation, the present investigation asked whether common graphic symbols (e.g.,!@#$%&) are afforded primarily verbal coding, akin to words, or whether they also invoke visual imagery, as do pictures. Across four experiments, participants were presented at study with graphic symbols or words (e.g., $ or 'dollar'). In Experiment 1, memory was assessed using free recall; in Experiment 2, memory was assessed using old-new recognition. In Experiment 3, the word set was restricted to a single category. In Experiment 4, memory for graphic symbols, pictures, and words was directly compared. All four experiments demonstrated a memory benefit for symbols relative to words. In a fifth experiment, machine learning estimations of inherent stimulus memorability were found to predict memory performance in the earlier experiments. This study is the first to present evidence that, like pictures, graphic symbols are better remembered than words, in line with dual-coding theory and with a distinctiveness account. We reason that symbols offer a visual referent for abstract concepts that are otherwise unlikely to be spontaneously imaged.

The enactment effect: A systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioral, neuroimaging, and patient studies.

The enactment effect is the phenomenon that physically performing an action represented by a word or phrase (e.g., clap, clap your hands) results in better memory than does simply reading it. We examined data from three different methodological approaches to provide a comprehensive review of the enactment effect across 145 behavioral, 7 neuroimaging, and 31 neurological patient studies. Boosts in memory performance following execution of a physical action were compared to those produced by reading words or phrases, by watching an experimenter perform actions, or by engaging in self-generated imagery. Across the behavioral studies, we employed random-effects meta-regression with robust variance estimation (RVE) to reveal an average enactment effect size of g = 1.23. Further meta-analyses revealed that variations in study design and comparison task reliably influence the size of the enactment effect, whereas four other experiment factors-test format, learning instruction type, retention interval, and the presence of objects during encoding-likely do not influence the effect. Neuroimaging studies demonstrated enactment-related activation to be prevalent in the motor cortex and inferior parietal lobule. Patient studies indicated that, regardless of whether impairments of memory (e.g., Alzheimer's) or of motor capability (e.g., Parkinson's) were present, patients were able to benefit from enactment. The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis highlight two components accounting for the memory benefit from enactment: a primary mental contribution relating to planning the action and a secondary physical contribution of the action itself. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Drawing and memory: Using visual production to alleviate concreteness effects.

Countless experiments have been devoted to understanding techniques through which memory might be improved. Many strategies uncovered in the literature are thought to act via the integration of contextual information from multiple distinct codes. However, the mnemonic benefits of these strategies often do not remain when there is no clear link between a word and its multisensory referent (e.g., in abstract words). To test the importance of this link, we asked participants to encode target words (ranging from concrete to abstract) either by drawing them, an encoding strategy recently proven to be reliable in improving memory, or writing them. Drawing provides a compelling test case because while other strategies (e.g., production, generation) shift focus to existing aspects of to-be-remembered information, drawing may forge a link with novel multisensory information, circumventing shortcomings of other memory techniques. Results indicated that while drawing's benefit was slightly larger for concrete stimuli, the effect was present across the spectrum from abstract to concrete. These findings demonstrate that even for highly abstract concepts without a clear link to a visual referent, memory is reliably improved through drawing. An exploratory analysis using a deep convolutional neural network also provided preliminary evidence that in abstract words, drawings that were most distinctive were more likely to be remembered, whereas concrete items benefited from prototypicality. Together, these results indicate that while the advantageous effects of drawing exist across all levels of concreteness, the memory benefit is larger when words are concrete, suggesting a tight coupling between the drawing benefit and visual code.

Re-evaluating whether bilateral eye movements influence memory retrieval.

Several recent studies have reported enhanced memory when retrieval is preceded by repetitive horizontal eye movements, relative to vertical or no eye movements. The reported memory boost has been referred to as the Saccade-Induced Retrieval Enhancement (SIRE) effect. Across two experiments, memory performance was compared following repetitive horizontal or vertical eye movements, as well as following a control condition of no eye movements. In Experiment 1, we conceptually replicated Christman and colleagues' seminal study, finding a statistically significant SIRE effect, albeit with weak Bayesian evidence. We therefore sought to conduct another close extension. In Experiment 2, horizontal and vertical eye movement conditions were manipulated separately, and sample size was increased. No evidence of a SIRE effect was found: Bayesian statistical analyses demonstrated significant evidence for a null effect. Taken together, these experiments suggest that the SIRE effect is inconsistent. The current experiments call into question the generalizability of the SIRE effect and suggest that its presence is very sensitive to experimental design. Future work should further assess the robustness of the effect before exploring related theories or underlying mechanisms.

Task preparation as a mnemonic: The benefits of drawing (and not drawing).

Creating a visual representation of an item through drawing affords that item a substantive memory benefit, relative to several control tasks. Recent findings demonstrate the robustness of this drawing effect across several stimulus classes, irrespective of encoding time, setting, age group, or memory measure. The advantage for drawn information has been attributed to the integrated contributions of at least three components of visual production through drawing, which can independently facilitate memory: elaborative, motoric, and pictorial. In the current work, we investigated the importance of the elaborative process one must engage in while preparing to draw, and directly tested whether this generative period alone was sufficient to improve memory. Participants were prompted to either draw or write out presented words, and were provided with a 1- or 2-s preparatory period prior to completing the prompted task. Critically, on a subset of the trials, participants were prevented from completing the prompted task. There was strong evidence in support of better memory for drawn items, which replicates the drawing effect commonly observed in prior work. Interestingly, following prompts to draw, there was also a reliable memory benefit of the preparatory period alone. In other words, simply engaging in the elaborative process of preparing to draw (i.e., without completing the drawing) was enough to produce a reliable increase in later memory relative to actually writing.