Abstract
Abstract. This registered report aims at replicating the so-called “mnemonic time-travel” effect. Aksentijevic, Brandt, Tsakanikos, and Thorpe (2019) reported that memory was improved when their participants experienced backward motion before a memory test in comparison to when they experienced forward motion or no motion. This finding was interpreted as suggesting that backward motion brought individuals back to the moment of encoding. In the original study, the mnemonic time-travel effect was robustly found with various types of backward motion (real, simulated, and imagined). Such a spectacular finding calls for a preregistered replication. To determine the robustness of the effect, we performed a close replication of Experiment 4 of Aksentijevic et al. in which the mnemonic time-travel effect was most pronounced. Despite sufficient statistical power to detect an even considerably smaller effect than the one reported by Aksentijevic et al., we found no significant differences among the different motion conditions. The present results thus disconfirm the idea that experiencing backward motion improves memory which suggests that the empirical robustness of the mnemonic time travel effect should be further scrutinized before any conclusions about mnemonic space and time can be drawn.
References
(2019). It takes me back: The mnemonic time-travel effect. Cognition, 182, 242–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.10.007
(2018). Positive effects of disruptive advertising on consumer preferences. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 41, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intmar.2017.09.002
(2014). The Replication Recipe: What makes for a convincing replication? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.10.005
(2015). PlumX. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103, 63–64. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.1.019
(1985). Effects of the mnemotechnique of loci in the memorization of concrete words. Acta Psychologica, 60, 11–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6918(85)90010-1
(2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
(1984). Enhancement of eyewitness memory: An empirical evaluation of the cognitive interview. Journal of Police Science & Administration, 12, 74–80.
(2013). Result-blind peer reviews and editorial decisions: A missing pillar of scientific culture. European Psychologist, 18, 286–294. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000144
(2019, March 29). Five ways you could become a memory champion. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20190329-five-ways-you-could-become-a-memory-champion
(2016). Reconceptualizing replication as a sequence of different studies: A replication typology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.09.009
(2019). Adaptive memory: Is the animacy effect on memory due to richness of encoding? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000733
(2013). Adaptive memory: The mnemonic value of animacy. Psychological Science, 24, 2099–2105.
. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349, aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
. (2011). Spectacular perspective from the rear of the TGV express train to Brussels, EU. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-a6p8LAD6Vo
(2012). German norms for semantic typicality, age of acquisition, and concept familiarity. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 380–394. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0164-y
(2014). The value of direct replication. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 76–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613514755
