The influence of articulation dynamics on recognition memory

Can sequencing of articulation ease explain the in-out effect? A preregistered test

Words whose consonantal articulation places move from the front of the mouth to the back (e.g. BADAKA; inward) receive more positive evaluations than words whose consonantal articulation places move from the back of the mouth to the front (e.g. KADABA; outward). This in-out effect has a variety of affective, cognitive, and even behavioural consequences, but its underlying mechanisms remain elusive. Most recently, a linguistic explanation has been proposed applying the linguistic easy-first account and the so-called labial-coronal effect from developmental speech research and phonology to the in-out effect: Labials (front) are easier to process than coronals (middle); and people prefer easy followed by harder motor components. Disentangling consonantal articulation direction and articulation place, the present three preregistered experiments (total N = 1012) found in-out effects for coronal-dorsal (back), and labial-dorsal articulation places. Critically, no in-out effect emerged for labial-coronal articulation places. Thus, the in-out effect is unlikely an instantiation of easy first.

On the emergence of the in-out effect across trials: two items do the trick

Individuals prefer letter strings whose consonantal articulation spots move from the front of the mouth to the back (e.g., BAKA, inward) over those with a reversed consonant order (e.g., KABA, outward), the so-called in-out effect. The present research explores whether individuals hold an internal standard or scheme of consonant order that triggers this effect. If this were the case, the in-out effect should already occur in one-trial between-subjects designs. If not, the in-out effect should emerge over the course of trials in within-subjects designs. In Experiments 1a-e (1b-e preregistered; total N = 2973; German, English, and Portuguese samples) employing a one-trial between-subjects design, no in-out effect was found. In Experiment 2 (N = 253), employing within-subjects designs with either 1, 5, 10, 30, or 50 trials per consonant order category (inward vs. outward), the in-out effect was absent in the first trial, but already surfaced for the first 2 trials, reached significance within the first 10 trials and a solid plateau within the first 20 trials. Of the four theoretical explanations, the present evidence favors the fluency/frequency and letter-position accounts and is at odds with the eating-related embodiment and easy-first accounts.

Disillusionment

Recent research has shown that perceptual processes carry intrinsic affect. But prior studies have only manipulated the occurrence of perceptual processes by presenting two different stimulus categories. The present studies go beyond this by manipulating perceptual expectations for identical stimuli. Seven experiments demonstrated that objectively identical stimuli become visually disappointing and are liked less when they violate the expectation that an intrinsically pleasant perceptual process will occur compared to when there is no perceptual expectation. These effects were specific to violations of perceptual expectations. By using between-subjects designs, participants' insight into the experimental manipulation was prevented. In combination with the use of identical stimuli across conditions, this provides the most stringent test of the idea that perception is intrinsically (un-)pleasant yet. The results are related to predictive coding frameworks and provide an explanation for why people sometimes enjoy additional perceptual effort.

Oral kinematics: examining the role of edibility and valence in the in-out effect

Previous research has revealed a stable preference for words with inward consonantal-articulation patterns (from the front to the back of the mouth; e.g. BENOKA), over outward-words (from the back to the front; e.g. KENOBA). Following the oral approach-avoidance account suggesting that the in-out effect is due to the resemblance between consonantal-articulations patterns and ingestion/expectoration, recent findings have shown that when judging inward-outward names for objects with particular oral functions, valence did not modulate the effect while the oral function did. To replicate and examine further the role of edibility and valence in shaping the in-out effect, we asked participants (N = 545) to rate inward and outward names for edible and non-edible products while controlling for valence. Results revealed that the motor-to-affect link was only observed for edible products, regardless of valence.

Exploring the temporal boundary conditions of the articulatory in-out preference effect

Earlier research has documented a preference for words with consonantal articulation patterns that move from the front to the back of the mouth (e.g., MENIKA) over words with reversely wandering consonantal articulation spots (e.g., KENIMA). The present experiments explored the temporal dynamics of the reading process in this in-out preference effect. In three experiments (total N = 344), we gradually reduced the presentation durations of inward and outward wandering words from 1000 ms down to 25 ms to approximate the minimum length of visual stimulus presentation required to trigger the effect. The in-out effect was reliably observed for exposure timings down to 50 ms, but vanished for 25 ms timings, which is line with previous evidence on phonological encoding. Thus, impressively, 50 ms of word presentation is sufficient to evoke the in-out effect. These findings suggest phonological activation to be a prerequisite and thus a driving mechanism of the in-out effect.