Realistic context doesn't amplify the survival processing effect: Lessons learned from Covid-19 scenarios.

ABSTRACT

Imagining being stranded in the grasslands of an unknown territory without basic survival materials and subsequently rating the relevance of words for this situation leads to exceptionally good memory for these words. This survival processing effect has received much attention, primarily because it has been argued to disclose the evolutionary foundations of human memory. So far, only fictitious scenarios were used to demonstrate this effect. To provide a fairer test of emotional response against richness-of-encoding explanations of the effect, we aimed at increasing everyday relevance and realism of the survival scenarios. For this purpose, we created two new Covid-19 scenarios, one focusing on emotional response (Covid-19-emotion) and the other on survival strategy (Covid-19-strategy). Both new scenarios were compared to the classical grassland and moving scenarios typically used to investigate the survival processing effect. In Experiment 1, we observed better memory for the grassland and Covid-19-strategy scenarios compared to the other two, but no significant difference between the former. A descriptively similar result pattern emerged in Experiment 2 for the number of ideas generated on how to use objects in the four scenarios. Theoretical implications are discussed.