Survival processing in times of stress

Survival processing advantage demonstrated with virtual reality-based survival environment: A promising tool for survival processing research

Many studies have been conducted to demonstrate the survival processing advantage (SPA) as an evolutionary-oriented memory effect. But few studies were conducted to demonstrate this effect in real-life or simulated survival environments. This study tested whether the SPA could be replicated in a survival virtual reality environment (VRE). In Experiment 1, the SPAs were measured in VREs (survival grasslands, survival battlefield, nonsurvival moving) in which Experiment 1A used the standard long instructions and Experiment 1B used the modified short instructions. In Experiment 2, the SPAs were measured again with the scenarios corresponding to the VREs used in Experiment 1A. All experiments demonstrated typical SPAs, suggesting that the survival VRE is a reliable tool in designing and delivering a survival situation. The potential problems of applying survival VRE to survival processing research are discussed at the end.

The STRESS-NL database: A resource for human acute stress studies across the Netherlands

Stress initiates a cascade of (neuro)biological, physiological, and behavioral changes, allowing us to respond to a challenging environment. The human response to acute stress can be studied in detail in controlled settings, usually in a laboratory environment. To this end, many studies employ acute stress paradigms to probe stress-related outcomes in healthy and patient populations. Though valuable, these studies in themselves often have relatively limited sample sizes. We established a data-sharing and collaborative interdisciplinary initiative, the STRESS-NL database, which combines (neuro)biological, physiological, and behavioral data across many acute stress studies in order to accelerate our understanding of the human acute stress response in health and disease (www.stressdatabase.eu). Researchers in the stress field from 12 Dutch research groups of 6 Dutch universities created a database to achieve an accurate inventory of (neuro)biological, physiological, and behavioral data from laboratory-based human studies that used acute stress tests. Currently, the STRESS-NL database consists of information on 5529 individual participants (2281 females and 3348 males, age range 6-99 years, mean age 27.7 ± 16 years) stemming from 57 experiments described in 42 independent studies. Studies often did not use the same stress paradigm; outcomes were different and measured at different time points. All studies currently included in the database assessed cortisol levels before, during and after experimental stress, but cortisol measurement will not be a strict requirement for future study inclusion. Here, we report on the creation of the STRESS-NL database and infrastructure to illustrate the potential of accumulating and combining existing data to allow meta-analytical, proof-of-principle analyses. The STRESS-NL database creates a framework that enables human stress research to take new avenues in explorative and hypothesis-driven data analyses with high statistical power. Future steps could be to incorporate new studies beyond the borders of the Netherlands; or build similar databases for experimental stress studies in rodents. In our view, there are major scientific benefits in initiating and maintaining such international efforts.

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

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.

Psychosocial stress has weaker than expected effects on episodic memory and related cognitive abilities: A meta-analysis

The impact of stress on episodic memory and related cognitive abilities is well documented in both animal and human literature. However, it is unclear whether the same cognitive effects result from all forms of stress - in particular psychosocial stress. This review systematically explored the effects of psychosocial stress on episodic memory and associated cognitive abilities. PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases were searched. Fifty-one studies were identified and compared based on the timing of stress induction. A small positive effect of post-learning psychosocial stress with a long retention interval was shown. No other effects of psychosocial stress were seen. Re-analysis of previous meta-analyses also showed no significant effect of psychosocial stress on episodic memory, highlighting potentially different effects between stressor types. Psychosocial stress also had a moderately different effect when emotional vs. neutral stimuli were compared. Finally, psychosocial stress also decreased performance on executive function, but not working memory tasks. Our findings demonstrate that psychosocial stress may not have the clear effects on episodic memory previously ascribed to it.

Adaptive Memory: Independent Effects of Survival Processing and Reward Motivation on Memory

Humans preferentially remember information processed for their survival relevance, a memorial benefit known as the survival processing effect. Memory is also biased towards information associated with the prospect of reward. Given the adaptiveness of these effects, they may depend on similar mechanisms. We tested whether motivation drives both effects, with reward incentives that are known to boost extrinsic motivation and survival processing perhaps stimulating intrinsic motivation. Accordingly, we manipulated survival processing and reward incentive independently during an incidental-encoding task in which participants chose between pairs of words concerning their relevance for a scenario, and examined the effects on encoding event-related potentials (ERP) activity and later performance on a surprise recall test. We hypothesized that if survival processing fosters intrinsic motivation, it should reduce the beneficial effects of extrinsic motivation (reward incentive). In contrast to this prediction, we found that reward incentive and survival processing independently improved memory and that the P300, a measure of lower-level cognitive resource allocation, was increased by reward incentive independent of survival processing. Further, survival processing and reward incentive independently increased the frontal slow wave (FSW), a measure of higher-level elaboration. These findings suggest that while survival processing and reward incentive may both increase encoding elaboration, the memory-enhancing effect of survival processing does not depend on increased intrinsic motivation. Additionally, we replicated a recent finding whereby the survival processing effect generalizes to a choice-based encoding task and further showed that the beneficial effect of choice on memory likely does not interact with either survival processing or reward.

Surviving in a second language: survival processing effect in memory of bilinguals

Human memory likely evolved to serve adaptive functions, that is, to help maximise our chances of survival and reproduction. One demonstration of such adaptiveness is the increased retention of information processed in survival contexts, the so-called Survival Processing Effect (SPE). This study examined this effect in a native (L1) and in a second language (L2). This comparison is relevant to explore if emotionality is involved in the SPE, as emotional activation seems to be larger in L1 than in L2. Following the original survival processing procedure, participants rated the relevance of information to the survival and moving scenarios and performed a recognition (Experiment 1) or a free recall (Experiment 2) task in L1 or L2. In both experiments, the SPE was replicated in L1 but not in L2. The absence of the effect when emotional activation is less likely suggests that emotionality might play a role in the survival processing effect; nevertheless, additional studies are needed to further investigate this hypothesis.

Good vibrations: An observational study of real-life stress induced by a stage performance

Stressors induce physiological changes in the brain and periphery that support adaptive defensive responses. The consequences of psychological stress on cognitive functioning are often measured in laboratory settings using experimentally induced stress that leads to mainly negative subjective feelings. There is a need for verification of these studies using real-life stressors that may potentially induce both positive and negative subjective feelings. In an observational study, we investigated real-life stress induced by voluntary stage performance at a large-scale music festival, including 126 participants (60 female, age range = 16-57 years). Our primary measurements involved salivary cortisol, heart rate, blood pressure, and positive and negative affect. In addition, participants completed a 2-back working memory task and a speeded decision-making task. We found that stage performance significantly increased salivary cortisol - with a particularly low number of cortisol non-responders - and heart rate, even when controlling for potential confounding factors, such as sleep, movement, and alcohol use. Interestingly, stage performance significantly decreased negative affect while increasing positive affect. This positively experienced stressor ("eustressor") was related to impaired working memory performance: the stronger the increases in cortisol, the slower participants responded to targets. Decision-making, however, was not affected. In conclusion, we show how stressful experiences in real-life can lead to positive affect, but still have a similar negative impact on cognitive functioning. We suggest that future research should focus more on the consequences of real-life stressors, and the consequences of eustress, in order to extend our understanding of the concept of psychological stress.

The Survival Advantage: Underlying Mechanisms and Extant Limitations

Recently, researchers have begun to investigate the function of memory in our evolutionary history. According to Nairne and colleagues (e.g., Nairne, Pandeirada, and Thompson, 2008 ; Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada, 2007 ), the best mnemonic strategy for learning lists of unrelated words may be one that addresses the same problems that our Pleistocene ancestors faced: fitness-relevant problems including securing food and water, as well as protecting themselves from predators. Survival processing has been shown to promote better recall and recognition memory than many well-known mnemonic strategies (e.g., pleasantness ratings, imagery, generation, etc.). However, the survival advantage does not extend to all types of stimuli and tasks. The current review presents research that has replicated Nairne et al.'s (2007) original findings, in addition to the research designs that fail to replicate the survival advantage. In other words, there are specific manipulations in which survival processing does not appear to benefit memory any more than other strategies. Potential mechanisms for the survival advantage are described, with an emphasis on those that are the most plausible. These proximate mechanisms outline the memory processes that may contribute to the advantage, although the ultimate mechanism may be the congruity between the survival scenario and Pleistocene problem-solving.

The survival advantage: Underlying mechanisms and extant limitations

Recently, researchers have begun to investigate the function of memory in our evolutionary history. According to Nairne and colleagues (e.g., Nairne, Pandeirada, and Thompson, 2008; Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada, 2007), the best mnemonic strategy for learning lists of unrelated words may be one that addresses the same problems that our Pleistocene ancestors faced: fitness-relevant problems including securing food and water, as well as protecting themselves from predators. Survival processing has been shown to promote better recall and recognition memory than many well-known mnemonic strategies (e.g., pleasantness ratings, imagery, generation, etc.). However, the survival advantage does not extend to all types of stimuli and tasks. The current review presents research that has replicated Nairne et al.'s (2007) original findings, in addition to the research designs that fail to replicate the survival advantage. In other words, there are specific manipulations in which survival processing does not appear to benefit memory any more than other strategies. Potential mechanisms for the survival advantage are described, with an emphasis on those that are the most plausible. These proximate mechanisms outline the memory processes that may contribute to the advantage, although the ultimate mechanism may be the congruity between the survival scenario and Pleistocene problem-solving.

Adaptive memory: identifying the proximate roots of the survival processing advantage

The current study examined the role of item-specific, relational, and elaborative processing on adaptive memory. Younger and older adults received the standard survival processing, a survival-short, or a pleasantness processing instruction. The survival-short condition was specifically included to lead to fewer possibilities to engage in elaborative processing. Furthermore, half of the presented words were categorized words to boost relational processing. Younger adults demonstrated the typical survival recall advantage in that standard survival processing instructions resulted in superior free recall performance than that of the survival-short and the pleasantness processing groups. Among older adults, no mnemonic benefit of standard survival processing relative to the survival-short or pleasantness processing groups was found. Furthermore, reducing the probability of elaborative processing (i.e., through the survival-short processing instructions) abolished the survival recall advantage. Our results thus provide further evidence for the role of item-specific, relational, and elaborative processing in the survival processing advantage.

The longevity of adaptive memory: evidence for mnemonic advantages of survival processing 24 and 48 hours later

Prior studies have convincingly demonstrated that survival-related processing of information enhances its subsequent retention. This phenomenon, known as the survival recall advantage, generalises to other stimuli, memory domains, and research populations, thereby underscoring its reliability. As previous studies used only short retention intervals between survival processing and the memory test, an important yet hitherto unanswered issue is whether this effect persists over time. The present experiment therefore examined whether survival processing also produces mnemonic benefits when retention is tested after longer delay periods. Participants (N =81) rated the relevance of words according to a survival and a moving scenario, and were then randomly assigned to the typical immediate (3-minute delay) retention test condition or conditions that included a 24- or 48-hour interval between survival processing and memory testing. In each of these conditions survival processing led to higher surprise free recall and recognition rates than processing words according to the moving scenario. Thus this study provides evidence that illustrates the longevity of survival processing advantages on memory performance.

Adaptive memory: evaluating alternative forms of fitness-relevant processing in the survival processing paradigm

Memory may have evolved to preserve information processed in terms of its fitness-relevance. Based on the assumption that the human mind comprises different fitness-relevant adaptive mechanisms contributing to survival and reproductive success, we compared alternative fitness-relevant processing scenarios with survival processing. Participants rated words for relevancy to fitness-relevant and control conditions followed by a delay and surprise recall test (Experiment 1a). Participants recalled more words processed for their relevance to a survival situation. We replicated these findings in an online study (Experiment 2) and a study using revised fitness-relevant scenarios (Experiment 3). Across all experiments, we did not find a mnemonic benefit for alternative fitness-relevant processing scenarios, questioning assumptions associated with an evolutionary account of remembering. Based on these results, fitness-relevance seems to be too wide-ranging of a construct to account for the memory findings associated with survival processing. We propose that memory may be hierarchically sensitive to fitness-relevant processing instructions. We encourage future researchers to investigate the underlying mechanisms responsible for survival processing effects and work toward developing a taxonomy of adaptive memory.

Proximate Mechanisms and the Development of Adaptive Memory

Scientific investigations into the functional properties of memory have recently undergone a rapid increase. These studies have revealed that processing stimuli for its survival value results in superior memory performance in children and adults. In this article, we critically evaluate this claim and conclude that survival-processing advantages in childhood and adulthood are not an indication that fitness-relevant information has adaptive priority. Instead, we argue that general memory principles (e.g., item-specific and relational processing, self-referential processing, elaboration and distinctiveness processing) better explain the adaptive function of memory. We stress the importance of these memory processes because they characterize the evolutionary adaptations of memory, are present early in life, and are developmentally invariant.

Survival of the selfish: contrasting self-referential and survival-based encoding

Processing information in the context of personal survival scenarios elicits a memory advantage, relative to other rich encoding conditions such as self-referencing. However, previous research is unable to distinguish between the influence of survival and self-reference because personal survival is a self-referent encoding context. To resolve this issue, participants in the current study processed items in the context of their own survival and a familiar other person's survival, as well as in a semantic context. Recognition memory for the items revealed that personal survival elicited a memory advantage relative to semantic encoding, whereas other-survival did not. These findings reinforce suggestions that the survival effect is closely tied with self-referential encoding, ensuring that fitness information of potential importance to self is successfully retained in memory.

Adaptive memory: the survival scenario enhances item-specific processing relative to a moving scenario

Nairne, Thompson, and Pandeirada (2007) found that retention of words rated for their relevance to survival is superior to that of words encoded under numerous other deep processing conditions. They suggested that our memory systems might have evolved to confer an advantage for survival-relevant information. Burns, Burns, and Hwang (2011) suggested a two-process explanation of the proximate mechanisms responsible for the survival advantage. Whereas most control tasks encourage only one type of processing, the survival task encourages both item-specific and relational processing. They found that when control tasks encouraged both types of processing, the survival processing advantage was eliminated. However, none of their control conditions included non-survival scenarios (e.g., moving, vacation, etc.), so it is not clear how this two-process explanation would explain the survival advantage when scenarios are used as control conditions. The present experiments replicated the finding that the survival scenario improves recall relative to a moving scenario in both a between-lists and within-list design and also provided evidence that this difference was accompanied by an item-specific processing difference, not a difference in relational processing. The implications of these results for several existing accounts of the survival processing effect are discussed.

Introducing the Maastricht Acute Stress Test (MAST): a quick and non-invasive approach to elicit robust autonomic and glucocorticoid stress responses

Stress-related research has employed several procedures to activate the human stress system. Two of the most commonly used laboratory paradigms are the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) and the Cold Pressor Test (CPT). We combined their most stressful features to create a simple laboratory stress test capable of eliciting strong autonomic and glucocorticoid stress responses. In comparison with the CPT and its variations, our stress tool (labeled the Maastricht Acute Stress Test; MAST) was found to yield superior salivary cortisol responses, while being equally effective in eliciting subjective stress reactions and (systolic and diastolic) blood pressure increases (study 1; N=80). In study 2 (N=20), we directly compared the effectiveness of the MAST and TSST and found that both methods elicited similar subjective, salivary alpha-amylase, and salivary cortisol stress responses. Finally, we developed and evaluated an appropriate no-stress control version of the MAST that was similar to the stress version, although it did not comprise stressful components (study 3; N=40). Collectively, our results confirm the effectiveness of the MAST in terms of subjective, autonomic, and--most importantly--glucocorticoid stress responses. Thus, as a brief and simple stress protocol, the MAST holds considerable promise for future research.