Vanderbilt University, PMB 407817, 2301 Vanderbilt Place, Nashville, TN 37240-7817, USA.
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2011 Nov;37(6):1579-87. doi: 10.1037/a0024347. Epub 2011 Jul 18.
Are there consequences of calling objects by their names? Lupyan (2008) suggested that overtly labeling objects impairs subsequent recognition memory because labeling shifts stored memory representations of objects toward the category prototype (representational shift hypothesis). In Experiment 1, we show that processing objects at the basic category level versus exemplar level in the absence of any overt labeling produces the same qualitative pattern of results. Experiment 2 demonstrates that labeling does not always disrupt memory as predicted by the representational shift hypothesis: Differences in memory following labeling versus preference are more likely an effect of judging preference, not an effect of overt labeling. Labeling does not influence memory by shifting memory representations toward the category prototype. Rather, labeling objects at the basic level produces memory representations that are simply less robust than those produced by other kinds of study tasks.
称呼物体的名称是否会产生后果？Lupyan（2008）认为，公开标记物体会损害后续的识别记忆，因为标记会将物体的存储记忆表示转移到类别原型（表示转移假说）。在实验 1 中，我们表明，在没有任何公开标记的情况下，以基本类别级别而非示例级别处理物体，会产生相同的定性结果模式。实验 2 表明，标记并不总是像表示转移假说所预测的那样破坏记忆：标记与偏好后的记忆差异更可能是判断偏好的结果，而不是公开标记的结果。标记不会通过将记忆表示转移到类别原型来影响记忆。相反，在基本级别上标记物体产生的记忆表示不如其他类型的学习任务产生的记忆表示那么稳健。
