Gatti Daniele, Somos Eszter, Mazzoni Giuliana, Jellema Tjeerd
Department of Brain and Behavioral Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Department of Psychology, University of Hull, Hull, UK.
Cogn Process. 2022 Aug;23(3):513-519. doi: 10.1007/s10339-022-01095-0. Epub 2022 Jun 15.
Autobiographical memories are thought to be retrieved using two possible ways: a generative one, which is effortful and follows a general-to-specific pathway, and a direct one, which is automatic and relatively effortless. These two retrieve processes are known to differ on the quantitative side (especially considering retrieval times), from a qualitative point of view; however, evidence is missing. Here, we aimed to disentangle this question by taking advantage of a dual-task paradigm in which the different tasks tax different executive functions. Participants were asked to perform an autobiographical memory task under three different conditions: no cognitive load, non-visual cognitive load and visual cognitive load. On the quantitative side, results replicated previous findings with generative processes being slower compared with direct ones. Conversely, on the qualitative side, results indicated that the retrieval times of both direct and generative retrieval processes varied similarly according to the dual-task condition, thus supporting the idea that the same memory process could underlie both retrievals.
一种是生成性方式，这种方式需要付出努力，遵循从一般到具体的路径；另一种是直接方式，这种方式是自动的且相对轻松。已知这两种提取过程在数量方面（特别是考虑到提取时间）存在差异，但从质量角度来看，证据尚不明确。在此，我们旨在利用一种双任务范式来解开这个问题，在该范式中，不同任务对不同的执行功能产生负担。参与者被要求在三种不同条件下执行自传体记忆任务：无认知负荷、非视觉认知负荷和视觉认知负荷。在数量方面，结果重复了先前的发现，即生成性过程比直接过程更慢。相反，在质量方面，结果表明直接和生成性提取过程的提取时间根据双任务条件的变化方式相似，从而支持了两种提取可能基于相同记忆过程的观点。
