Survival Processing. How Does It Work In Memory - Research Paper Example

S., 5 June 2008). How does it work in memory? Survival processing is attributed to the brain processing danger signals and recalling fight or flight type responses in order to help quicken the response time and physical reaction of the survivor. Ancestral memory is programmed memory that is inherited; the advantage of survival memory is the quicker recall levels than encoding memory used by enhancing procedures or categorical processing (Nairne, J.S., Pandeirada, N. S., 5 June 2008). Is the effect based on the evolutionary mechanisms or more commonplace memory explanations?

According to Darwin (Origin of the Species, 1859, reprint 1988, p. 62), memory is selectively shaped through natural selection and evolution, sustaining the important pieces relative to the species’ survival. Nairne and Pandeirada developed experiments and collected data to substantiate this view, although later attempts by others to duplicate these events were not as successful. Nairne and Pandeirada stated that “fitness relevant encodings are remembered particularly well” (Nairne, J.S.

, Pandeirada, N. S., 5 June 2008). Scenarios were introduced with characteristics that enhanced life threatening feelings or anticipatory excitement were more memorable. Even using encoding of pleasantness (such as a vacation scenario) did not result in more memory enhancement. However, when Butler, Kang, and Roediger (Butler, p. 1477)attempted to garner the same response, they were forced to make a different conclusion. According to Butler, et al,final recall was highest when the type of processing and thematerials were congruent, as Nairne published, indicating that people remember stimuli better if the stimuli are congruent with thegoals associated with their processing.

However, contrary to Nairne’s results, “no survival processing advantageemerged between the 2 congruent conditions or for a list of irrelevant words. When congruity was controlledin a mixed list design, the survival processing advantage disappeared”(Butler, 2009, Vol. 35, No. 6,). Savine (Savine, 2011, June 9) used Nairne’s hypothesis to describe the advantages of survival processing, “survival processing produces better retention than imagery,pleasantness rating, self-reference, generation, and intentionallearning— processing conditions that are consideredto be some of the best for later retention” and to test his theory that survival processing is used in facial recognition.

In Experiment 1, survival processing had no advantage. In Experiment 2 and 3, Savine concluded that “survival processing did not improve face recognition orincrease the confidence of recognition judgments” (Savine, 2011, June 9). Schult used the intention-superiority effect, so defined as the shorterlatencies for reactions to stimuli intended for futureenactment, relative to stimuli associated with no enactmentor canceled enactmentshorteror canceled enactment, to demonstrate a duplicate pattern to the Nairne results(Schult, 2011, May 18).

Schult concluded that the relationship we have with the stimuli and the anticipated event propels our ability to recall a reaction to the data. This negates the “survival processing advantage” as discussed by Nairne and Pandeirada. Survival memory, when recreated in a grasslands setting, was more successful (Butler, 2009, Vol. 35, No. 6,), leading Nairne to project that the grasslands setting was more amenable to ancestral recollection and memory. Working on the position that our ancestors were grassland