![Sample our Behavioral Sciences journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110801/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Behavioral-Sciences.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
Memory for actions is usually better following subject-performed tasks (SPT) than verbal tasks (VT). We hypothesised that enactment unitises the components of actions such that familiarity can support associative recognition following SPT. To examine this hypothesis, participants studied verb–object pairs in a SPT or VT condition. During testing, they discriminated between intact, recombined and new items and made Remember/Know judgments; additionally, their EEGs were recorded. Associative recognition was better following SPT than VT. Early frontal event-related potentials (ERPs) were graded according to the item status following SPT, but no such effects were found after VT. Similarly, the late parietal ERPs were graded following SPT, whereas these effects were smaller and did not differ between intact and recombined items following VT. We conclude that enactment unitised the action and object so that familiarity could contribute to associative recognition and that recollection became sensitive to the amount of the matching associative information.
Notes
1 There is a long-lasting controversy about whether this distinction is relevant (e.g., Diana, Reder, Arndt, & Park, Citation2006) or superfluous because all differences can be explained by a single strength model (e.g., Wixted, Citation2007). We do not want to engage in this discussion because it is not relevant to our prediction. We are interested in changes in familiarity and their EEG correlates. The controversy instead focuses on the specific role of recollection. Familiarity effects are compatible with both single- and dual-process models.