Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) discovered a strong and rather general memory advantage for word material processed in a survival-related context. One possible explanation of this effect conceives survival processing as a special form of encoding: Nature specifically "tuned" our memory systems to process and remember fitness-relevant information. We tested this explanation by studying whether the survival processing effect is robust against encoding manipulations that do not affect the fitness relevance of information. Three experiments replicated a strong survival processing effect under standard conditions but showed that the mnemonic benefit of survival processing diminishes or even vanishes when participants focus on a single problem (Experiments 1 and 2) or technique (Experiment 3) of survival. We argue that it is not survival processing per se that facilitates recall but the richness and distinctiveness with which information is encoded.
A popular hypothesis in evolutionary psychology posits that reciprocal altruism is supported by a cognitive module that helps cooperative individuals to detect and remember cheaters. Consistent with this hypothesis, a source memory advantage for faces of cheaters (better memory for the cheating context in which these faces were encountered) was observed in previous studies. Here, we examined whether positive or negative expectancies would influence source memory for cheaters and cooperators. A cooperation task with virtual opponents was used in Experiments 1 and 2. Source memory for the emotionally incongruent information was enhanced relative to the congruent information: In Experiment 1, source memory was best for cheaters with likable faces and for cooperators with unlikable faces; in Experiment 2, source memory was better for smiling cheater faces than for smiling cooperator faces, and descriptively better for angry cooperator faces than for angry cheater faces. Experiments 3 and 4 showed that the emotional incongruity effect generalizes to 3rd-party reputational information (descriptions of cheating and trustworthy behavior). The results are inconsistent with the assumption of a highly specific cheater detection module. Focusing on expectancy-incongruent information may represent a more efficient, general, and hence more adaptive memory strategy for remembering exchange-relevant information than focusing only on cheaters.
The present study examines memory for social-exchange-relevant information. In Experiment 1 male and female faces were shown together with behaviour descriptions of cheating, altruistic, and neutral behaviour. Previous results have led to the hypothesis that people preferentially remember schema-atypical information. Given the common gender stereotype that women are kinder and less egoistic than men, this atypicality account would predict that source memory (that is, memory for the type of context to which a face was associated) should be enhanced for female cheaters in comparison to male cheaters. The results of Experiment 1 confirmed this hypothesis. Experiment 2 reveals that source memory for female faces associated with disgusting behaviours is enhanced in comparison to male faces associated with disgusting behaviours. Thus the atypicality effect generalises beyond social-exchange-relevant information, a result which is inconsistent with the assumption that the findings can be ascribed to a highly specific cheater detection module.
In a series of experiments, Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) demonstrated that words judged for their relevance to a survival scenario are remembered better than words judged for a scenario not relevant on a survival dimension. They explained this survival-processing effect by arguing that nature "tuned" our memory systems to process and remember fitness-relevant information. Kroneisen and Erdfelder (2011) proposed that it may not be survival processing per se that facilitates recall but the richness and distinctiveness with which information is encoded. To further test this account, we investigated how the survival processing effect is affected by cognitive load. If the survival processing effect is due to automatic processes or, alternatively, if survival processing is routinely prioritized in dual-task contexts, we would expect this effect to persist under cognitive load conditions. If the effect relies on cognitively demanding processes like richness and distinctiveness of encoding, however, the survival processing benefit should be hampered by increased cognitive load during encoding. Results were in line with the latter prediction, that is, the survival processing effect vanished under dual-task conditions.
Enhanced memory for cheaters could be suited to avoid social exchange situations in which we run the risk of getting exploited by others. Several experiments demonstrated that we have better source memory for faces combined with negative rather than positive behavior (Bell & Buchner, Memory & Cognition, 38, 29-41, 2010) or for cheaters and cooperators showing unexpected behavior (Bell, Buchner, Kroneisen, Giang, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38, 1512-1529, 2012). In the present study, we compared two groups: Group 1 just saw faces combined with aggressive, prosocial or neutral behavior descriptions, but got no further information, whereas group 2 was explicitly told that they would now see the behavior descriptions of very aggressive and unsocial persons. To measure old-new discrimination, source memory, and guessing biases separately, we used a multinomial model. When having no expectancies about the behavior of the presented people, enhanced source memory for aggressive persons was found. In comparison, source memory for faces combined with prosocial behavior descriptions was significantly higher in the group expecting only aggressive persons. These findings can be attributed to a mechanism that focuses on expectancy-incongruent information, representing a more flexible and therefore efficient memory strategy for remembering exchange-relevant information.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.