Remise en question de la modularité en mémoire

Tableau d’honneur de la Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales, 2009-2010Le maintien de l'ordre en mémoire à court terme suscite depuis longtemps un intérêt marqué en psychologie cognitive expérimentale. Même si l'information à traiter dans l'environnement est souvent de nature spatiale, la plupart des recherches sur la mémoire à court terme portept sur le traitement de l'information verbale. Par ailleurs, le traitement de l'information verbale et -spatiale en mémoire à court terme fait encore l'objet d'un débat en psychologie cognitive. Certains auteurs suggèrent qu'il existe un module indépendant responsable de traiter chaque type d'information (p. ex., Baddeley & Hitch, 1974). Cette approche est notamment supportée par la démonstration de dissociations entre le traitement de l'information verbale et le traitement de l'information spatiale (p. ex., Meiser & Klauer, 1999). Une approche unitaire quant à elle, soutient que les processus en mémoire sont indépendants du type d'information à traiter (p. ex., Jones, Macken, & Nicholls, 2004). Cette approche trouve appui parmi les études qui démontrent que la rétention de l'information spatiale et la rétention de l'information verbale produisent des patrons de performance équivalents (p. ex., Ward, Avons, & Melling, 2005). L'objectif de la thèse est de tester ces visions alternatives et de vérifier si les mêmes processus sont sollicités lor"s de la rétention de l'information verbale et spatiale. La rétention de l'information spatiale et verbale est comparée directement à l'aide d'une tâche classique de rappel où les participants doivent rappeler l'ordre dans lequel des séries d'items ont été présentées (Chapitre II). Une procédure de double dissociation combinée à une analyse approfondie des erreurs sont utilisées. Bien que les résultats démontrent la présence d'une double dissociation, le traitement de l'information verbale et spatiale produit des patrons d'erreurs équivalents. Dans le chapitre III, les facteurs qui influencent le rappel de l'information spatiale sont examinés afin de mieux comprendre la nature des processus responsables de retenir ce type d'information. Une analyse du mouvement oculaire combinée à l'utilisation d'une tâche de suppression oculaire montre que l'efficacité avec laquelle les yeux sont déplacés entre les items influence la mémoire pour les localisations spatiales. L'ensemble de ces résultats est interprété à la lumière d'une nouvelle approche théorique selon laquelle la coopération entre les systèmes perceptifs et moteurs sont responsables de la rétention de l'information

A Replication of “Motor and Visual Codes Interact to Facilitate Visuospatial Memory Performance (2007; Experiment 1)”

The present study is a replication of Chum, Bekkering, Dodd, and Pratt (2007). Motor and visual codes interact to facilitate visuospatial memory performance. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1189-1193

Bank of Standardized Stimuli (BOSS) Phase II: 930 New Normative Photos

<div><p>Researchers have only recently started to take advantage of the developments in technology and communication for sharing data and documents. However, the exchange of experimental material has not taken advantage of this progress yet. In order to facilitate access to experimental material, the Bank of Standardized Stimuli (BOSS) project was created as a free standardized set of visual stimuli accessible to all researchers, through a normative database. The BOSS is currently the largest existing photo bank providing norms for more than 15 dimensions (e.g. familiarity, visual complexity, manipulability, etc.), making the BOSS an extremely useful research tool and a mean to homogenize scientific data worldwide. The first phase of the BOSS was completed in 2010, and contained 538 normative photos. The second phase of the BOSS project presented in this article, builds on the previous phase by adding 930 new normative photo stimuli. New categories of concepts were introduced, including animals, building infrastructures, body parts, and vehicles and the number of photos in other categories was increased. All new photos of the BOSS were normalized relative to their name, familiarity, visual complexity, object agreement, viewpoint agreement, and manipulability. The availability of these norms is a precious asset that should be considered for characterizing the stimuli as a function of the requirements of research and for controlling for potential confounding effects.</p></div

The word length effect in backward recall: the role of response modality

In immediate serial recall, it is well known that participants are better at recalling short rather than long words. This benchmark memory effect, known as word length effect, has been observed numerous times in forward recall. However, in backward recall, when participants are required to recall items in the reverse order, contradictory findings have been reported. For instance, in some studies, the word length effect was abolished in backward recall, whereas in others it was maintained. In the present study, we investigated the role of response modality in accounting for this discrepancy. Our results showed that in forward recall, the word length effect is unaffected by response modality. In backward recall with a manual response (click or written), the word length effect is as large as in forward recall. Critically, when participants recalled a word orally, the word length effect was severely reduced in backward recall. We concluded that response modality interacts with the processes called upon in backward recall

Matrix of correlations.

<p>NA = Modal Name Agreement, Fam = Familiarity, VC = Visual Complexity, CA = Category Agreement, OA = Object Agreement, VA = Viewpoint Agreement, Manip = Manipulability.</p><p>*Significant correlation.</p><p>Matrix of correlations.</p

Norms as a function of gender.

<p>DKO = Don’t know object, DKN = Don’t know name, TOT = Tip-of-the-tongue, NA = Modal name agreement, H = H value, Fam = Familiarity, VC = Visual Complexity, CA = Category Agreement, Hcat = H value for category, OA = Object Agreement, VA = Viewpoint Agreement, Manip = Manipulability.</p><p>*The agreement or rating is significantly different (.05< p <.0042) from the agreement or rating of the other gender.</p><p>**The agreement or rating is significantly different (p<.0042) from the agreement or rating of the other gender.</p><p>Norms as a function of gender.</p

Examples of stimuli from the animal, food, body part, musical instrument, hand labour tool and accessory, vehicle, and weapon and war related item categories.

<p>Examples of stimuli from the animal, food, body part, musical instrument, hand labour tool and accessory, vehicle, and weapon and war related item categories.</p

Norms as a function of categories.

<p>Nb = Number of stimuli, DKO = Don’t know object, DKN = Don’t know name, TOT = Tip-of-the-tongue, NA = Modal name agreement, H = H value, Fam = Familiarity, VC = Visual Complexity, CA = Category Agreement, Hcat = H value for category, OA = Object Agreement, VA = Viewpoint Agreement, Manip = Manipulability.</p><p>*Fruit, vegetable, and nut category was statistically compared with the other categories.</p><p>**All animals were collapsed together and compared statistically with the other categories. Subgroups of animals were not statistically compared.</p><p>Norms as a function of categories.</p

Norms.

<p>*The modal name and category of males and females were not systematically the same, thus explaining why the norms of all subjects do not correspond to the averages of the two subgroups.</p><p>**Statistics for 464 stimuli.</p><p>***p<.0001.</p><p>Norms.</p