Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Read carefully, because this is important! How value-driven strategies impact sentence memory

  • Published:
Memory & Cognition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Little is understood about how people strategically process and remember important but complex information, such as sentences. In the current study, we asked whether people can effectively prioritize memory for sentences as a function of their relative importance (operationalized as a reward point value) and whether they do so, in part, by changing their sentence processing strategies when value information is available in advance. We adapted the value-directed remembering paradigm (Castel, Psychol Learn Motiv 48:225–270, 2007) for sentences that varied in constraint and predictability. Each sentence was associated with a high or low value for subsequent free recall (whole sentence) and recognition (sentence-final words) tests. Value information appeared after or before each sentence as a between-subject manipulation. Regardless of condition, we observed that high-value sentences were recalled more often than low-value sentences, showing that people can strategically prioritize their encoding of sentences. However, memory patterns differed depending on when value information was available. Recall for high-value sentences that ended unexpectedly (and therefore violated one’s predictions) was reduced in the Before compared to the After condition. Before condition participants also showed a greater tendency to false alarm to lures (words that were the predicted – but not obtained – ending) from strongly constraining sentences. These observations suggest that when people try to prioritize sentence-level information that they know is valuable, the reading strategies they employ may paradoxically lead to worse memory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adcock, R. A., Thangavel, A., Whitfield-Gabrieli, S., Knutson, B., & Gabrieli, J. D. (2006). Reward-motivated learning: Mesolimbic activation precedes memory formation. Neuron,50(3), 507–517.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Alloway, T. P. (2007). Investigating the roles of phonological and semantic memory in sentence recall. Memory,15(6), 605–615.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Altmann, G. T., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition,73(3), 247–264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Altmann, G. T., & Mirković, J. (2009). Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science,33(4), 583–609.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ariel, R., Dunlosky, J., & Bailey, H. (2009). Agenda-based regulation of study-time allocation: When agendas override item-based monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,138(3), 432.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ariel, R., Price, J., & Hertzog, C. (2015). Age-related associative memory deficits in value-based remembering: The contribution of agenda-based regulation and strategy use. Psychology and Aging,30(4), 795.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language,68(3), 255–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. arXiv:1406.5823.

  • Brewer, W. F. (1975). Memory for ideas: Synonym substitution. Memory & Cognition,3(4), 458–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brothers, T., Dave, S., Hoversten, L. J., Traxler, M. J., & Swaab, T. Y. (2019). Flexible predictions during listening comprehension: Speaker reliability affects anticipatory processes. Neuropsychologia,135, 107225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brothers, T., Swaab, T. Y., & Traxler, M. J. (2017). Goals and strategies influence lexical prediction during sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language,93, 203–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, M. J., Le, Y. K., & Piedmont, R. L. (2018). Who is mturk? personal characteristics and sample consistency of these online workers. Mental Health, Religion & Culture,21(9–10), 934–944.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casey, L. S., Chandler, J., Levine, A. S., Proctor, A., & Strolovitch, D. Z. (2017). Intertemporal differences among mturk workers: Time-based sample variations and implications for online data collection. Sage Open,7(2), 2158244017712774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castel, A. D. (2007). The adaptive and strategic use of memory by older adults: Evaluative processing and value-directed remembering. Psychology of Learning and Motivation,48, 225–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castel, A. D., Benjamin, A. S., Craik, F. I., & Watkins, M. J. (2002). The effects of aging on selectivity and control in short-term recall. Memory & Cognition,30(7), 1078–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castel, A. D., Farb, N. A., & Craik, F. I. (2007). Memory for general and specific value information in younger and older adults: Measuring the limits of strategic control. Memory & Cognition,35(4), 689–700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castel, A. D., Murayama, K., Friedman, M. C., McGillivray, S., & Link, I. (2013). Selecting valuable information to remember: Age-related differences and similarities in self-regulated learning. Psychology and Aging,28(1), 232.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, M. S., Rissman, J., Suthana, N. A., Castel, A. D., & Knowlton, B. J. (2014). Value-based modulation of memory encoding involves strategic engagement of fronto-temporal semantic processing regions. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience,14(2), 578–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, M., MacGregor, L. J., & Donaldson, D. I. (2007). It’s the way that you, er, say it: Hesitations in speech affect language comprehension. Cognition,105(3), 658–668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F. I., Govoni, R., Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Anderson, N. D. (1996). The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes in human memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,125(2), 159.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dell, G. S., & Chang, F. (2014). The p-chain: Relating sentence production and its disorders to comprehension and acquisition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences,369(1634), 20120394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLong, K. A., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2005). Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience,8(8), 1117–1121.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elliott, B. L., McClure, S. M., & Brewer, G. A. (2020). Individual differences in value-directed remembering. Cognition,201, 104275.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Federmeier, K. D. (2022). Connecting and considering: Electrophysiology provides insights into comprehension. Psychophysiology,59(1), e13940.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (1999). A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language,41(4), 469–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Federmeier, K. D., Wlotko, E. W., De Ochoa-Dewald, E., & Kutas, M. (2007). Multiple effects of sentential constraint on word processing. Brain Research,1146, 75–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fernandes, M. A., & Moscovitch, M. (2000). Divided attention and memory: Evidence of substantial interference effects at retrieval and encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,129(2), 155.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Festini, S. B., Hartley, A. A., Tauber, S. K., & Rhodes, M. G. (2013). Assigned value improves memory of proper names. Memory,21(6), 657–667.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. P., & Craik, F. I. (1980). The effects of elaboration on recognition memory. Memory & Cognition,8(5), 400–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss, D. J., & Cairns, H. S. (1970). Some effects of memory limitation upon sentence comprehension and recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior,9(5), 541–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. C., McGillivray, S., Murayama, K., & Castel, A. D. (2015). Memory for medication side effects in younger and older adults: The role of subjective and objective importance. Memory & Cognition,43(2), 206–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frisson, S., Rayner, K., & Pickering, M. J. (2005). Effects of contextual predictability and transitional probability on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,31(5), 862.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, M. L., Benjamin, A. S., Sahakyan, L., & Stanley, S. E. (2019). A matter of priorities: High working memory enables (slightly) superior value-directed remembering. Journal of Memory and Language,108, 104032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, M. G., Kelly, A. J., & Smith, A. D. (2013). Working memory and the strategic control of attention in older and younger adults. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences,68(2), 176–183.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessee, J. P., Patterson, T. K., Castel, A. D., & Knowlton, B. J. (2019). Forget me not: Encoding processes in value-directed remembering. Journal of Memory and Language,106, 29–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, P., & Murray, D. (1974). Free recall of sentences as a function of imagery and predictability. Journal of Experimental Psychology,102(4), 748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hubbard, R. J., Rommers, J., Jacobs, C. L., & Federmeier, K. D. (2019). Downstream behavioral and electrophysiological consequences of word prediction on recognition memory. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 291.

  • Jongman, S. R., & Federmeier, K. D. (2022). Age-related changes in the structure and dynamics of the semantic network. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 1–15

  • Knowlton, B. J., & Castel, A. D. (2022). Memory and reward-based learning: A value-directed remembering perspective. Annual Review of Psychology,73(1), 25–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuperberg, G. R., & Jaeger, T. F. (2016). What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience,31(1), 32–59.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leippe, M. R., Wells, G. L., & Ostrom, T. M. (1978). Crime seriousness as a determinant of accuracy in eyewitness identification. Journal of Applied Psychology,63(3), 345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, W.-J., Horner, A. J., Bisby, J. A., & Burgess, N. (2015). Medial prefrontal cortex: Adding value to imagined scenarios. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,27(10), 1957–1967.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Matzen, L. E., & Benjamin, A. S. (2009). Remembering words not presented in sentences: How study context changes patterns of false memories. Memory & Cognition,37(1), 52–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matzen, L. E., & Benjamin, A. S. (2013). Older and wiser: Older adults’ episodic word memory benefits from sentence study contexts. Psychology and Aging,28(3), 754.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McFalls, E. L., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (2002). The influence of contextual constraints on recall for words within sentences. American Journal of Psychology,115(1), 67–88.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Middlebrooks, C. D., Kerr, T., & Castel, A. D. (2017). Selectively distracted: Divided attention and memory for important information. Psychological Science,28(8), 1103–1115.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, D. H., & Castel, A. D. (2021). Metamemory that matters: Judgments of importance can engage responsible remembering. Memory,29(3), 271–283.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, D. H., & Castel, A. D. (2021). Responsible remembering and forgetting as contributors to memory for important information. Memory & Cognition,49(5), 895–911.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, D. H., & Castel, A. D. (2022). The role of attention and ageing in the retrieval dynamics of value-directed remembering. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,75(5), 954–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, D. H., Hoover, K. M., & Castel, A. D. (2022). Strategic metacognition: Self-paced study time and responsible remembering. Memory & Cognition, 1–18.

  • Ness, T. and Meltzer-Asscher, A. (2021). Rational adaptation in lexical prediction: The influence of prediction strength. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.

  • Ng, S., Payne, B. R., Stine-Morrow, E. A., & Federmeier, K. D. (2018). How struggling adult readers use contextual information when comprehending speech: Evidence from event-related potentials. International Journal of Psychophysiology,125, 1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, E. J., & Myers, J. L. (1985). When comprehension difficulty improves memory for text. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,11(1), 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, B. R., & Federmeier, K. D. (2017). Pace yourself: Intraindividual variability in context use revealed by self-paced event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,29(5), 837–854.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Potter, M. C., & Lombardi, L. (1990). Regeneration in the short-term recall of sentences. Journal of Memory and Language,29(6), 633–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • R Core Team. (2021). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Röer, J. P., Bell, R., Körner, U., & Buchner, A. (2019). A semantic mismatch effect on serial recall: Evidence for interlexical processing of irrelevant speech. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,45(3), 515.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rommers, J., & Federmeier, K. D. (2018). Lingering expectations: A pseudo-repetition effect for words previously expected but not presented. NeuroImage,183, 263–272.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rommers, J., & Federmeier, K. D. (2018). Predictability’s aftermath: Downstream consequences of word predictability as revealed by repetition effects. Cortex,101, 16–30.

  • Soderstrom, N. C., & McCabe, D. P. (2011). The interplay between value and relatedness as bases for metacognitive monitoring and control: Evidence for agenda-based monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,37(5), 1236.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Steen-Baker, A. A., Ng, S., Payne, B. R., Anderson, C. J., Federmeier, K. D., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. (2017). The effects of context on processing words during sentence reading among adults varying in age and literacy skill. Psychology and Aging,32(5), 460.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stefanidi, A., Ellis, D. M., & Brewer, G. A. (2018). Free recall dynamics in value-directed remembering. Journal of Memory and Language,100, 18–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Berkum, J. J. (2010). The brain is a prediction machine that cares about good and bad-any implications for neuropragmatics? Italian Journal of Linguistics,22, 181–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Berkum, J. J., Brown, C. M., Zwitserlood, P., Kooijman, V., & Hagoort, P. (2005). Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: Evidence from erps and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition,31(3), 443.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1990). Interactions between sentence context and word frequencyinevent-related brainpotentials. Memory & Cognition,18(4), 380–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Petten, C., & Kutas, M. (1991). Influences of semantic and syntactic context on open-and closed-class words. Memory & Cognition,19(1), 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villaseñor, J. J., Sklenar, A. M., Frankenstein, A. N., Levy, P. U., McCurdy, M. P., & Leshikar, E. D. (2021). Value-directed memory effects on item and context memory. Memory & Cognition,49(6), 1082–1100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicha, N. Y., Moreno, E. M., & Kutas, M. (2004). Anticipating words and their gender: An event-related brain potential study of semantic integration, gender expectancy, and gender agreement in spanish sentence reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,16(7), 1272–1288.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wlotko, E. W., & Federmeier, K. D. (2012). So that’s what you meant! event-related potentials reveal multiple aspects of context use during construction of message-level meaning. NeuroImage,62(1), 356–366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wlotko, E. W., & Federmeier, K. D. (2015). Time for prediction? the effect of presentation rate on predictive sentence comprehension during word-by-word reading. Cortex,68, 20–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wlotko, E. W., Federmeier, K. D., & Kutas, M. (2012). To predict or not to predict: Age-related differences in the use of sentential context. Psychology and Aging,27(4), 975.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Wong, S., Irish, M., Savage, G., Hodges, J. R., Piguet, O., & Hornberger, M. (2019). Strategic value-directed learning and memory in alzheimer’s disease and behavioural-variant frontotemporal dementia. Journal of Neuropsychology,13(2), 328–353.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, 603 E Daniel St, Champaign, IL, 61820, USA

    Yu Min W. Chung & Kara D. Federmeier

Authors
  1. Yu Min W. Chung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kara D. Federmeier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu Min W. Chung.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix: Distribution of recall responses

Appendix: Distribution of recall responses

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chung, Y.M.W., Federmeier, K.D. Read carefully, because this is important! How value-driven strategies impact sentence memory. Mem Cogn 51, 1511–1526 (2023). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-023-01409-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-023-01409-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation