A motor isolation effect: When object manipulability modulates recall performance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies suggested that the language production architecture is recruited during verbal retention, and others proposed that spatial memory relies on the oculomotor system. The objective of the present study was to investigate the role of the motor system in object memory, by examining the effect of objects' affordances on retention. In a serial recall task, we manipulated the manipulability of objects to retain in memory. We used an isolation paradigm where we isolated the manipulability level of one object from the list. We showed that recall performance improved for the isolated object (Experiment 1) and that this advantage was abolished when participants were required to perform motor suppression during the task (Experiment 2). In Experiment 3, we showed that the abolition of the motor isolation effect in Experiment 2 was not due to an effect of distraction since motor suppression was shown not to interfere with a semantic isolation effect. It is argued that motor affordances play a role in object memory, but only when the motor characteristics of an object allow discriminating it from the other objects in the list.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".