The actions associated with objects are thought to be automatically activated when processing object names. Recent studies, however, have failed to find evidence for a role of the motor system in long-term memory for objects. One exception is a study by van Dam et al. (2013) in which participants studied object names associated with pressing (e.g., doorbell) or twisting (e.g., jar), followed by pressing or twisting actions in a seemingly unrelated task. In the final memory test, performance for action congruent words was better than for action incongruent words. We aimed to generalize these findings. In Experiments 1 and 2, we found no effect of action congruency on repetition priming in lexical decision and man-made/natural decision. In Experiment 3, the action congruency manipulation was administered immediately after initial study or a day later, just prior to the recognition memory test. We found no effects of action congruency and timing of the action. Finally, Experiment 4 was a direct replication of Experiment 1 of van Dam et al. (2013). Again, we failed to find an effect of poststudy action congruency. Thus, we obtained no evidence for the view that motor actions play a role in long-term memory for objects.

中文翻译：

---

学习后行动一致性对记忆巩固的影响。

在处理对象名称时，与对象关联的动作被认为是自动激活的。然而，最近的研究未能找到运动系统在物体长期记忆中的作用的证据。一个例外是 van Dam 等人的一项研究。（2013 年）参与者研究了与按压（例如门铃）或扭转（例如罐子）相关的对象名称，然后在看似无关的任务中进行按压或扭转动作。在最后的记忆测试中，动作一致的词的表现要好于动作不一致的词。我们旨在概括这些发现。在实验 1 和 2 中，我们发现动作一致性对词汇决策和人为/自然决策中的重复启动没有影响。在实验 3 中，在初始研究后或一天后，就在识别记忆测试之前，立即进行动作一致性操作。我们没有发现动作一致性和动作时间的影响。最后，实验 4 是对 van Dam 等人的实验 1 的直接复制。（2013）。再一次，我们没能找到事后行动一致性的影响。因此，我们没有获得任何证据表明运动动作在物体的长期记忆中起作用。