Publications by authors named "Angela M Lambert"

2 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Neural correlates of the production effect: An fMRI study.

Brain Cogn 2021 Jun 12;152:105757. Epub 2021 Jun 12.

Memorial University of Newfoundland, Department of Psychology, St. John's, NL A1B 3X9, Canada. Electronic address:

Recognition memory is improved for items produced at study (e.g., by reading them aloud) relative to a non-produced control condition (e.g., silent reading). This production effect is typically attributed to the extra elements in the production task (e.g., motor activation, auditory perception) enhancing item distinctiveness. To evaluate this claim, the present study examined the neural mechanisms underlying the production effect. Prior to a recognition memory test, different words within a study list were read either aloud, silently, or while saying "check" (as a sensorimotor control condition). Production improved recognition, and aloud words yielded higher rates of both recollection and familiarity judgments than either silent or control words. During encoding, fMRI revealed stronger activation in regions associated with motor, somatosensory, and auditory processing for aloud items than for either silent or control items. These activations were predictive of recollective success for aloud items at test. Together, our findings are compatible with a distinctiveness-based account of the production effect, while also pointing to the possible role of other processing differences during the aloud trials as compared to silent and control.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
June 2021

The production effect in long-list recall: In no particular order?

Can J Exp Psychol 2016 Jun;70(2):165-76

Department of Psychology, Western University.

The production effect reflects a memory advantage for words read aloud versus silently. We investigated how production influences free recall of a single long list of words. In each of 4 experiments, a production effect occurred in a mixed-list group but not across pure-list groups. When compared to the pure-list groups, the mixed-list effects typically reflected a cost to silent words rather than a benefit to aloud words. This cost persisted when participants had to perform a generation or imagery task for the silent items, ruling out a lazy reading explanation. This recall pattern challenges both distinctiveness and strength accounts, but is consistent with an item-order account. By this account, the aloud words in a mixed list disrupt the encoding of item-order information for the silent words, thus impairing silent word recall. However, item-order measures and a forced-choice order test did not provide much evidence that recall was guided by retrieval of item-order information. We discuss our pattern of results in light of another recent study of the effects of production on long-list recall. (PsycINFO Database Record
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source Listing
June 2016