Contextual modulation of prime response retrieval processes: Evidence from auditory negative priming

Abstract

Contextual similarity between learning and test phase has been shown to be beneficial for memory retrieval. Negative priming is known to be caused by multiple processes; one of which is episodic retrieval. Therefore, the contextual similarity of prime and probe presentations should influence the size of the negative priming effect. This has been shown for the visual modality. In Experiment 1, an auditory four-alternative forced choice reaction time task was used to test the influence of prime-probe contextual similarity on negative priming and the processes underlying the modulation by context. The negative priming effect was larger when the auditory context was repeated than when it was changed from prime to probe. The modulation by context was exclusively caused by an increase in prime response retrieval errors in ignored repetition trials with context repetition, whereas repeating only the context but not the prime distractor did not lead to an increase in prime response retrieval. This exact pattern of results was replicated in Experiment 2. The findings suggest that contextual information is integrated with prime distractor and response information. Retrieval of the previous episode, including prime distractor, prime response, and context (event file), can be triggered when the former prime distractor is repeated, whereas a context cue alone does not retrieve the event file. This suggests an event file structure that is more complicated than its usually assumed binary structure.

Binding and Retrieval in Action Control (BRAC)

“…For instance, it should be possible to generalize to all action-control paradigms the observation that attentional and perceptual parameters targeting the stimulus and response components of event-files (salience, grouping, feature weighting, inhibition [58,61]) affect event-file binding and/or retrieval. The same holds for contextual influences [62] and the impact of emotion [55]. BRAC suggests expanding research beyond the almost exclusive paradigm-specific approaches to action control, and instead advocates describing the underlying processes by a single overarching framework.…”

Saliency determines the integration of contextual information into stimulus–response episodes

“…Thus, repeating the lowsaliency contexts should neither retrieve the prime response directly nor facilitate the retrieval of the prime response induced by the repetition of the prime distractor stimulus. As for moderate-saliency contexts, a replication of the findings by Mayr et al (2018) is expected: The contextual stimulus should be involved in a configural binding-that is, a larger prime-response retrieval effect induced by the repetition of the prime distractor stimulus should be found when the context is also repeated than when it is changed. High-saliency contexts, on the other hand, may be bound directly with the response.…”

“…The latter authors distinguished between a unitary structure integrating an individual feature and the response (a so-called binary binding) and an integration among several features and the response, referred to as configural binding. Accordingly, the integration of context found in Mayr et al (2018) can be categorized as a configural binding-that is, the context and distractor form a compound which is bound with the response. Mayr et al (2018) replicated the evidence of configural binding of the context in a second experiment.…”

“…Accordingly, the integration of context found in Mayr et al (2018) can be categorized as a configural binding-that is, the context and distractor form a compound which is bound with the response. Mayr et al (2018) replicated the evidence of configural binding of the context in a second experiment. However, it remains an open question whether context is limited to be involved in configural binding structures or it can also enter into a binary binding with the response.…”

Evidences for better recall of congruent items in episodic memory

“…It is possible that our understanding of episodic memory is very different from the one commonly used in attentional research, which inspired Rosner et al ( 2015 ) work (Neill et al 1992 ; Neill and Westberry 1987 ; Mayr et al 2018 ). In this field, the term ‘episodic’ is generally used theoretically, to argue against inhibition or to allude to long-term memory processes taking place in selective attention tasks, without a direct measure of it.…”