Neural pattern similarity underlies the mnemonic advantages for living words.
It has been consistently shown that words representing living things are better remembered than words representing nonliving things, yet the underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms have not been clearly elucidated. The present study used both univariate and multivariate pattern analyses to examine the hypotheses that living words are better remembered because (1) they draw more attention and/or (2) they share more overlapping semantic features. Subjects were asked to study a list of living and nonliving words during a semantic judgment task. An unexpected recognition test was administered 30 min later. We found that subjects recognized significantly more living words than nonliving words. Results supported the overlapping semantic feature hypothesis by showing that (a) semantic ratings showed greater semantic similarity for living words than for nonliving words, (b) there was also significantly greater neural global pattern similarity (nGPS) for living words than for nonliving words in the posterior portion of left parahippocampus (LpPHG), (c) the nGPS in the LpPHG reflected the rated semantic similarity, and also mediated the memory differences between two semantic categories, and (d) greater univariate activation was found for living words than for nonliving words in the left hippocampus (LHIP), which mediated the better memory performance for living words and might reflect greater semantic context binding. In contrast, although living words were processed faster and elicited a stronger activity in the dorsal attention network, these differences did not mediate the animacy effect in memory. Taken together, our results provide strong support to the overlapping semantic features hypothesis, and emphasize the important role of semantic organization in episodic memory encoding.
State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning & IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China; Center for Collaboration and Innovation in Brain and Learning Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China.
Xiaoqian
X
Xiao
State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning & IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China; Center for Collaboration and Innovation in Brain and Learning Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China.
Qi
Q
Dong
Department of Psychology and Social Behavior, University of California, Irvine, United States.
Chuansheng
C
Chen
State Key Laboratory of Cognitive Neuroscience and Learning & IDG/McGovern Institute for Brain Research, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China; Center for Collaboration and Innovation in Brain and Learning Sciences, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, PR China. Electronic address: guixue@gmail.com.
Gui
G
Xue
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D001921:Brain / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000502:physiology*; D001931:Brain Mapping; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007091:Image Processing, Computer-Assisted; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging; D008297:Male; D008568:Memory / Q000502:physiology*; D061212:Memory, Episodic; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D012660:Semantics; D055815:Young Adult
Animacy effect; Episodic memory; Global matching; MTL; Neural global pattern similarity; Representational similarity analysis