Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
From Thought to Senses: Assessing the Relationship Between the Generation Effect and Multisensory Facilitation Cover

From Thought to Senses: Assessing the Relationship Between the Generation Effect and Multisensory Facilitation

Open Access
|Sep 2026
Read online

References

  1. Agustín-Llach, M. P. (2023). Foreign language semantic categorization: Evidence from the semantic network and word connections. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 205–222. 10.22055/RALS.2023.18077
  2. Alais, D., & Burr, D. (2004). The ventriloquist effect results from near-optimal bimodal integration. Current Biology, 14(3), 257–262. 10.1016/j.cub.2004.01.029
  3. Begg, I., Snider, A., Foley, F., & Goddard, R. (1989). The generation effect is no artifact: Generating makes words distinctive. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15(5), 977–989. 10.1037/0278-7393.15.5.977
  4. Bertsch, S., Pesta, B. J., Wiscott, R., & McDaniel, M. A. (2007). The generation effect: A meta-analytic review. Memory & Cognition, 35(2), 201–210. 10.3758/bf03193441
  5. Burns, D. J. (1992). The consequences of generation. Journal of Memory and language, 31(5), 615–633. 10.1016/0749-596X(92)90031-R
  6. Burton, H., Snyder, A. Z., Diamond, J. B. $ Raichle, M. E. (2002). Adaptive changes in early and late blind: A fMRI study of verb generation to heard nouns. Journal of Neurophysiology, 88, 3359–3371. 10.1152/jn.00129.2002
  7. Chang, A. C. S. (2009). Gains to L2 listeners from reading while listening vs. listening only in comprehending short stories. System, 37(4), 652–663. 10.1016/j.system.2009.09.009
  8. Clark, C. M., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2021). On the role of generation rules in moderating the beneficial effects of errorful generation. Zeitschrift Fur Psychologie, 229(2), 120–130. 10.1027/2151-2604/a000442
  9. Craik, F. I., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 671–684. 10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
  10. Diao, Y., & Sweller, J. (2007). Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learning and instruction, 17(1), 78–88. 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.11.007
  11. Elias, S. M. (2004). Means of assessing ordinal interactions in social psychology: The case of sexism in judgments of social power. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34(9), 1857–1877. 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02589.x
  12. Ernst, M. O., & Banks, M. S. (2002). Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature, 415, 429–433. 10.1038/415429a
  13. Fahey, S., Charette, L., Francis, C., & Zheng, Z. (2018). Multisensory integration of signals for bodily self-awareness requires minimal cognitive effort. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 72(4), 244–252. 10.1037/cep0000152
  14. Falchier, A., Clavagnier, S., Barone, P., & Kennedy, H. (2002) Anatomical evidence of multimodal integration in primate striate cortex. Journal of Neuroscience, 22, 5749–5759. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.22-13-05749.2002
  15. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149–1160. 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
  16. Friston, K. (2005). A theory of cortical responses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 360, 815–836. 10.1098/rstb.2005.1622
  17. Gardiner, J. M., Gregg, V. H., & Hampton, J. A. (1988). Word frequency and generation effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(4), 687–693. 10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.687
  18. Gardiner, J. M., & Hampton, J. A. (1985). Semantic memory and the generation effect: Some tests of the lexical activation hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11(4), 732–741. 10.1037/0278-7393.11.1-4.732
  19. Ghazanfar, A. A., & Schroeder, C. E. (2006) Is neocortex essentially multisensory? Trends in Cognitive Science, 10, 278–285. 10.1016/j.tics.2006.04.008
  20. Gingras, G., Rowland, B. A., & Stein, B. E. (2009). The differing impact of multisensory and unisensory integration on behavior. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 4897–4902. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4120-08.2009
  21. Johns, E. E., & Swanson, L. G. (1988). The generation effect with nonwords. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(1), 180–190. 10.1037/0278-7393.14.1.180
  22. Kalyuga, S. (2000). When using sound with a text or picture is not beneficial for learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2). 10.14742/ajet.1829
  23. Kartal, G., & Simsek, H. (2017). The effects of audiobooks on EFL students’ listening comprehension. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 17(1), 112–123.
  24. Kim, N. Y. (2021). E-Book, Audio-Book, or E-Audio-Book: The Effects of Multiple Modalities on EFL Comprehension. English Teaching, 76(4), 33–52. 10.15858/engtea.76.4.202112.33
  25. Kim, R. S., Seitz, A. R., & Shams, L. (2008) Benefits of stimulus congruency for multisensory facilitation of visual learning. PLoS ONE, 3(1), e1532. 10.1371/journal.pone.0001532
  26. Kinoshita, S. (1989). Generation enhances semantic processing? The role of distinctiveness in the generation effect. Memory & Cognition, 17(5), 563–571. 10.3758/bf03197079
  27. Kornell, N., Hays, M. J., & Bjork, R. A. (2009). Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35(4), 989–998. 10.1037/a0015729
  28. Labaronne, M., Jarjat, G., & Plancher, G. (2023). Attentional refreshing in the absence of long-term memory content: Role of short-term and long-term consolidation. Journal of Cognition, 6(1), 5. 10.5334/joc.246
  29. Leger, K. R., Snyder, H. R., Boduroglu, A., & Gutchess, A. (2024). The role of culture and semantic organization in working memory updating. Memory, 32(5), 576–586. 10.1080/09658211.2024.2351062
  30. Liu, H., Cao, S., & Wu, S. (2019). An experimental comparison on reading comprehension effect of visual, audio and dual channels. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 56(1), 716–718. 10.1002/pra2.148
  31. MacLeod, C. M. (2011). I said, you said: The production effect gets personal. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(6), 1197–1202. 10.3758/s13423-011-0168-8
  32. McCurdy, M. P., Viechtbauer, W., Sklenar, A. M., Frankenstein, A. N., & Leshikar, E. D. (2020). Theories of the generation effect and the impact of generation constraint: A meta-analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27, 1139–1165. 10.3758/s13423-020-01762-3
  33. McDaniel, M. A., Waddill, P. J., & Einstein, G. O. (1988). A contextual account of the generation effect: A three-factor theory. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(5), 521–536. 10.1016/0749-596X(88)90023-X
  34. McElroy, L. A., & Slamecka, N. J. (1982). Memorial consequences of generating nonwords: Implications for semantic-memory interpretations of the generation effect. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(3), 249–259. 10.1016/S0022-5371(82)90593-X
  35. Meredith, M. A., Wallace, M. T., & Stein, B. E. (1992). Visual, auditory and somatosensory convergence in output neurons of the cat superior colliculus: Multisensory properties of the tecto-reticulo-spinal projection. Experimental Brain Research, 88(1), 181–186. 10.1007/bf02259139
  36. Mohamed, M. M. K. (2018). Using audiobooks for developing listening comprehension among Saudi EFL preparatory year students. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(1), 64–73. https://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0901.08
  37. Morais, A. S., Olsson, H., & Schooler, L. J. (2013). Mapping the structure of semantic memory. Cognitive science, 37(1), 125–145. 10.1111/cogs.12013
  38. Moran, Z. D., Bachman, P., Pham, P., Cho, S. H., Cannon, T. D., & Shams, L. (2013). Multisensory encoding improves auditory recognition. Multisensory Research, 26(6), 581–592. 10.1163/22134808-00002436
  39. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16(5), 519–533. 10.1016/S0022-5371(77)80016-9
  40. Mulligan, N. W. (2002). The emergent generation effect and hypermnesia: Influences of semantic and nonsemantic generation tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28(3), 541–554. 10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.541
  41. Mulligan, N. W. (2004). Generation and memory for contextual detail. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30(4), 838. 10.1037/0278-7393.30.4.838
  42. Mulligan, N. W., Smith, S. A., & Buchin, Z. L. (2019). The generation effect and experimental design. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(8), 1422–1431. 10.1037/xlm0000663
  43. Nairne, J. S., Pusen, C., & Widner, R. L. (1985). Representation in the mental lexicon: Implications for theories of the generation effect. Memory & Cognition, 13(2), 183–191. 10.3758/BF03197011
  44. Nairne, J. S., & Widner, R. L. (1988). Familiarity and lexicality as determinants of the generation effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 14(4), 694–699. 10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.694
  45. Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 402–407. 10.3758/BF03195588
  46. Park, S. J., & Yi, Y. (2024). A Simple Technique Assessing Ordinal and Disordinal Interaction Effects. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 49(6), 912–929. 10.3102/10769986231217472
  47. Payne, D. G., Neely, J. H., & Burns, D. J. (1986). The generation effect: Further tests of the lexical activation hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 14(3), 246–252. 10.3758/BF03197700
  48. Peirce, J., Gray, J. R., Simpson, S., MacAskill, M., Höchenberger, R., Sogo, H., … & Lindeløv, J. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior research methods, 51(1), 195–203. 10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y
  49. Potts, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2014). The benefit of generating errors during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 644–667. 10.1037/a0033194
  50. Rao, R. P., & Ballard, D. H. (1999). Predictive coding in the visual cortex: A functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects. Nature Neuroscience, 2, 79–87. 10.1038/4580
  51. Rockland, K. S., & Ojima, H. (2003) Multisensory convergence in calcarine visual areas in macaque monkey. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 50, 19–26. 10.1016/S0167-8760(03)00121-1
  52. Röder, B., Stock, O., Bien, S., Neville, H., & Rosler, F. (2002). Speech processing activates visual cortex in congenitally blind humans. European Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 930–936. 10.1046/j.1460-9568.2002.02147.x
  53. Rogowsky, B. A., Calhoun, B. M., & Tallal, P. (2016). Does modality matter? The effects of reading, listening, and dual modality on comprehension. Sage Open, 6(3). 10.1177/2158244016669550
  54. Seitz, A. R., Kim, R., & Shams, L. (2006) Sound facilitates visual learning. Current Biology, 16, 1422–1427. 10.1016/j.cub.2006.05.048
  55. Shams, L., & Seitz, A. R. (2008). Benefits of multisensory learning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 411–417. 10.1016/j.tics.2008.07.006
  56. Shams, L., Wozny, D. R., Kim, R., & Seitz, A. (2011). Influences of multisensory experience on subsequent unisensory processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 264. 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00264
  57. Slamecka, N. J., & Fevreiski, J. (1983). The generation effect when generation fails. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22(2), 153–163. 10.1016/S0022-5371(83)90112-3
  58. Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 4(6), 592–604. 10.1037/0278-7393.4.6.592
  59. Slutsky, D. A., & Recanzone, G. H. (2001). Temporal and spatial dependency of the ventriloquism effect. Neuroreport, 12(1), 7–10. 10.1097/00001756-200101220-00009
  60. Stevenson, R. A., Zemtsov, R. K., & Wallace, M. T. (2012). Individual differences in the multisensory temporal binding window predict susceptibility to multisensory illusions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(6), 1517–1529. 10.1037/a0027339
  61. Thomson, D. M., & Tulving, E. (1970). Associative encoding and retrieval: Weak and strong cues. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86(2), 255–262. 10.1037/h0029997
  62. Tyler, S. W., Hertel, P. T., McCallum, M. C., & Ellis, H. C. (1979). Cognitive effort and memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5(6), 607–617. 10.1037/0278-7393.5.6.607
  63. Wagenmakers, E.-J., Krypotos, A.-M., Criss, A. H., & Iverson, G. (2012). On the interpretation of removable interactions: A survey of the field 33 years after Loftus. Memory & Cognition, 40(2), 145–160. 10.3758/s13421-011-0158-0
  64. Wallace, M., Roberson, G., Hairston, W., Stein, B., Vaughan, J., & Schirillo, J. (2004). Unifying multisensory signals across time and space. Experimental Brain Research, 158(2). 10.1007/s00221-004-1899-9
  65. Wallace, M. T., & Stevenson, R. A. (2014). The construct of the multisensory temporal binding window and its dysregulation in developmental disabilities. Neuropsychologia, 64, 105–123. 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.08.005
  66. Wallace, M. T., Wilkinson, L. K., & Stein, B. E. (1996). Representation and integration of multiple sensory inputs in primate superior colliculus. Journal of Neurophysiology, 76(2), 1246–1266. 10.1152/jn.1996.76.2.1246
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.522 | Journal eISSN: 2514-4820
Language: English
Page range: 50 - 50
Submitted on: Aug 7, 2026
Accepted on: Sep 17, 2026
Published on: Sep 28, 2026
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2026 Michaela Ritchie, Jonathan Wilbiks, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.