Investigating the structure of Autobiographical Memory (AM):
The impact of spatial and event cues on an AM Fluency Task
S. Chu, S. Sheldon
Department of Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Romantic
Experiences
Sights
Event cues access memories from the
“Event Themes” category. In contrast,
spatial cues access memories from the
“Episodic Elements” category.
SPECIFIC
Accomplishments
Social Outings
Travelling
Romantic Experiences
Work/School Tasks
Getting or Giving a Gift
Memorable Meals
Holiday Celebrations
Concert Venue
Mall
Park
Market
Waiting Room
Coffee Shop
Office
Classroom
Verbal Fluency Task (60s per task)
• Phonemic: Subjects list as many words as possible that start with same letter
• Category: Subjects list as many animals as possible
Methods
Part 1
Cue  Generate as many
memories as
90s
possible
Date
Scale of 1-6
Vividness
Scale of 1-5
Part 2
Describe the first and last
memories for each cue type in
detail
3 mins
References
1) Conway, M. A., Singer, J. A. & Tagini, A. (2004) The Self and Autobiographical Memory:
Correspondence and Coherence. Social Cognition, 22(5), 491-529.
2) Harris, C. B., O'Connor, A. R., & Sutton, J. (May 01, 2015). Cue generation and memory
construction in direct and generative autobiographical memory retrieval. Consciousness and
Cognition, 33, 204-216.
3) Reiser, B. J., Black, J. B., & Abelson, R. P. (1985). Knowledge structures in the organization and
retrieval of autobiographical memories. Cognitive psychology, 17(1), 89-137.
Sounds
Perceptual
Place
4.8
10
* P < .05
7
9
3
4.6
Time
Average Vividness Rating
For First and Last
Memories
30
* P < .05
4.4
4
3.8
3.6
8
3.4
3.2
7
First
15
10
5
(t(64)=-1.487, p =.04)
Internal
Percent of Internal Details in 3
Minute Recall
Spatial
Event
Average Age and Vividness by Condition
Event
Theme
Spatial
• The number of memories generated for event cues
is significantly greater for event cues compared to
3.06
3.13
spatial cues, suggesting that when we access
Age
memories by an event theme, we can remember
3.92
3.85
more instances pertaining to that theme
Vividness
• In contrast, the reaction time to generate a memory
suggests a trend in which spatial cues are faster.
• Average age and vividness of the memory
This suggests that when given a location, we
differed non-significantly, suggesting that
access a memory directly from the pool of
the memories differed only on the number
episodic elements. This enables us to recall an
of memories and the time required to
instance faster, but we may generate less instances
access them
pertaining to that node
Acknowledgements: We thank Wendy Wang and Julia Donahue for their help with
memory scoring
Spatial
0.7
Event
0.68
0.66
0.64
0.62
0.6
0.58
0.56
First
F(1,31) =0.946, p = 0.338
Last
Last
First
Last
0
6
F(1,12.1) = .001, p < .05
Conclusions
20
First
Last
4
Event
25
3
0.72
Spatial
Average Number of
Details by Order and
Type of Detail
* P < .05
4.2
5
2
Other
Results
Average Reaction Time to Generate
First Memory by Condition
8
4
Repetition
Who was present
Average Number of Memories
Generated by Condition
5
Emotion/Thought
Working first job
Results
6
Semantic
Outfit
Reaction Time (Seconds)
BROAD
SPATIAL
Winning a
soccer game
External Details
• Factual details
• Details not directly
related to the event
Internal Details
Details related to the event.
More details here indicate a
richer episodic memory
5
Average Number of Memories Generated
EVENT THEME
Smells
Holiday
Celebrations
• Average number of years of education:
14
Condition
Weather
Receiving an
A on a paper
Accomplishments
Participants
Materials
A method used to quantify the elements in
a recounted episodic memory
Location
Autobiographical Fluency Task
• Sample: 28 students from McGill
University
• Age: 18-35; 22 Females and 6 Males
Episodic Elements
High School
Graduation
Episodic
Memory
Autobiographical Interview
Average number of details
Autobiographical memory (AM), or the ability to recall past personal
events, is a fundamental cognitive process implicated in everyday
functions ranging from remembering and planning, to problem
solving and learning1. When an AM is retrieved, related or
overlapping events are recalled so that the memory can be integrated
into relational schemas or knowledge structures1. The nature of these
knowledge structure is unclear. In the current study, we tested
whether AM knowledge structure was based upon event similarity or
scene-similarity to determine whether our personal, episodic memory
store was accessed based on a general function of coherence or
correspondence2. We also determine how accessing AM via event or
scene cues during retrieval subsequently affected how these memories
were recalled.
Events
Event Themes
Question 2: Does the way a memory is accessed
affect how it is remembered?
Vivdness Rating
Key Analysis
1. How are memories organized and subsequently retrieved?
2. Does the way a memory is accessed affect how it is remembered?
Question 1: How are memories organized and subsequently
retrieved?
Percentage of Internal Details
Introduction
External
Conclusions
• The first and last memories differed
significantly for vividness but not for
age, suggesting that memories that are
activated less strongly by the same
cue are recalled less vividly, but may
not differ in age
• On average, first memories have more
Internal details compared to last
memories. This pattern does not hold
true for external memories. This
suggests that the first memory a cue
elicits draws on more episodic details,
contributing to its increased vividness
• Analysis of the percent of internal details indicates a trend towards First-Spatial
memories having a higher percentage of internal details compared to First-Event
memories. This provides support for the model that directly cueing memories based
on “Episodic Elements” will lead to increased activation of similar episodic
elements within that level of the AM system. This pattern no longer holds true for
the last memories, which may be more variable in nature.