The bizarreness effect and visual imagery : no impact of concurrent visuo-spatial distractor tasks indicates little role for visual imagery

buir.contributor.authorBesken, Miri
buir.contributor.orcidBesken, Miri|0000-0002-8024-4173
dc.citation.epage15en_US
dc.citation.spage1en_US
dc.contributor.authorBesken, Miri
dc.contributor.authorMulligan, N. W.
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-11T13:14:14Z
dc.date.available2022-02-11T13:14:14Z
dc.date.issued2021-08-05
dc.departmentDepartment of Psychologyen_US
dc.description.abstractAncient as well as modern writers have promoted the idea that bizarre images enhance memory. Research has documented bizarreness effects, with one standard technique finding that sentences describing unusual, implausible, or bizarre scenarios are better remembered than sentences describing plausible, every day, or common scenarios. Not surprisingly, this effect is often attributed to visual imagery, and the effect often referred to as the bizarre imagery effect. But the role of imagery has been disputed even as research has found it difficult to clearly distinguish the effects of imagery from other possible bases for the bizarreness advantage. The current experiments assessed the visual-imagery hypothesis by disrupting visual imagery processes during encoding, which should reduce the bizarreness effect if it is indeed due to imagery. Specifically, one group carried out a concurrent task that selectively disrupted visual working memory (and visual imagery) during the encoding of sentences; a control group encoded the sentences without distraction. Across four experiments, the distractor task was dynamic visual noise, the spatial tapping task, and a visual span task. Each experiment found a robust bizarreness effect that was never reduced by visuospatial distraction. Combined, meta-analytic, and Bayesian analyses concurred with the results of the individual experiments. The results indicate little role for visual imagery in the bizarreness effect.en_US
dc.description.provenanceSubmitted by Merve Nalbant (merve.nalbant@bilkent.edu.tr) on 2022-02-11T13:14:14Z No. of bitstreams: 1 The_bizarreness_effect_and_visual_imagery_No_impact_of_concurrent_visuo-spatial_distractor_tasks_indicates_little_role_for_visual_imagery.pdf: 363606 bytes, checksum: 677ede20ce2e38d8b1901be7f7cf372e (MD5)en
dc.description.provenanceMade available in DSpace on 2022-02-11T13:14:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 The_bizarreness_effect_and_visual_imagery_No_impact_of_concurrent_visuo-spatial_distractor_tasks_indicates_little_role_for_visual_imagery.pdf: 363606 bytes, checksum: 677ede20ce2e38d8b1901be7f7cf372e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2021-08-05en
dc.identifier.doi10.1037/xlm0001038en_US
dc.identifier.eissn1939-1285
dc.identifier.issn0278-7393
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11693/77296
dc.language.isoEnglishen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Associationen_US
dc.relation.isversionofhttps://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001038en_US
dc.source.titleJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognitionen_US
dc.subjectBizarreness effecten_US
dc.subjectVisual imageryen_US
dc.subjectVisual working memoryen_US
dc.subjectEpisodic memoryen_US
dc.subjectVividnessen_US
dc.titleThe bizarreness effect and visual imagery : no impact of concurrent visuo-spatial distractor tasks indicates little role for visual imageryen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
The_bizarreness_effect_and_visual_imagery_No_impact_of_concurrent_visuo-spatial_distractor_tasks_indicates_little_role_for_visual_imagery.pdf
Size:
237.12 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.69 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: