Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) proposed that our memory systems serve an adaptive function and that they have evolved to help us remember fitness-relevant information. In a series of experiments, they demonstrated that processing words according to their survival relevance resulted in better retention than did rating them for pleasantness, personal relevance, or relevance to moving to a new house. The aim of the present study was to examine whether the advantage of survival processing could be replicated, using a control condition that was designed to match the survival processing task in arousal, novelty, and media exposure—the relevance to planning a bank heist. We found that survival processing nonetheless yielded better retention on both a recall (Experiment 1) and a recognition (Experiment 2) test. This mnemonic advantage of survival processing was also obtained when words were rated for their relevance to a character depicted in a video clip (Experiment 3). Our findings provide additional evidence that the mnemonic benefit of survival processing is a robust phenomenon, and they also support the utility of adopting a functional perspective in investigating memory.
Buller, D. J. (2005). Evolutionary psychology: The emperor’s new paradigm. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 277–283.
Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (2004). Extensions of the Paivio, Yuille, and Madigan (1968) norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 371–383.
Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33A, 497–505.
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268–294.
Decety, J., & Sommerville, J. A. (2003). Shared representations between self and other: A social cognitive neuroscience view. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 527–533.
Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 20, 1–55.
Hunt, R. R., & McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The enigma of organization and distinctiveness. Journal of Memory & Language, 32, 421–445.
Klein, S. B., Cosmides, L., Tooby, J., & Chance, S. (2002). Decisions and the evolution of memory: Multiple systems, multiple functions. Psychological Review, 109, 306–329.
Kučera, H., & Francis, W. (1967). Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
Nairne, J. S. (2005). The functionalist agenda in memory research. In A. F. Healy (Ed.), Experimental psychology and its applications (pp. 115–126). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Nairne, J. S., Thompson, S. R., & Pandeirada, J. N. S. (2007). Adaptive memory: Survival processing enhances retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 33, 263–273.
Packman, J. L., & Battig, W. F. (1978). Effects of different kinds of semantic processing on memory for words. Memory & Cognition, 6, 502–508.
Schulman, A. I. (1974). Memory for words recently classified. Memory & Cognition, 2, 47–52.
Sherry, D. F., & Schacter, D. L. (1987). The evolution of multiple memory systems. Psychological Review, 94, 439–454.
Symons, C. S., & Johnson, B. T. (1997). The self-reference effect in memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 121, 371–394.
Van Overschelde, J. P., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). Category norms: An updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms. Journal of Memory & Language, 50, 289–335.
About this article
Cite this article
Kang, S.H.K., McDermott, K.B. & Cohen, S.M. The mnemonic advantage of processing fitness-relevant information. Memory & Cognition 36, 1151–1156 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.36.6.1151
- Rating Task
- Survival Scenario
- Pleasantness Condition
- Mnemonic Benefit
- Mnemonic Advantage