Neural Networking: Online Social Content Easier to Recall Than Printed Info

Call it the Facebook Effect—humans are better at remembering information if it appears as a social network post

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

 

Recollecting trivial and sometimes dull Facebook posts is easier than recalling the same information in a book. It also takes less effort to remember posted patter than someone's face, according to new research.

The result could be due to the colloquial and largely spontaneous nature of Facebook posts. Whereas books and newspapers typically are combed over by fact-checkers and carefully rewritten by editors, Facebook posts tend to be free flowing and more closely resemble speech. "It's a new way of thinking about memory," says John Wixted, an experimental psychologist at the University of California, San Diego, who was not involved in the research. "Our minds are naturally prepared to encode what is naturally produced."


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


If memories are the product of evolution, then the ability to remember socially derived conversations may have provided an advantage that helped early humans survive, he adds.

The study involved three different experiments with a sample that largely included undergraduate females and controlled for such factors as the use of emoticons, variations in character size and emotional content. What the research team found didn't make sense—at first.

Laura Mickes, a cognitive psychologist at U.C. San Diego and lead author of the study, says colleagues in her department were amazed by the consistency of the results. "To our surprise the microblogs, the Facebook posts, are much more memorable than one would expect," Mickes says. "People mostly think they're mundane and would be easily forgotten."

Even accounting for associative thinking—such as, "that is something my friend Emily would post"—the social networking site still had a pronounced effect on the extent to which information was remembered by study subjects. Facebook's advantage over books and faces is on the same scale as the advantage that the average person has over the memory-impaired, Mickes wrote in the January 2013 Memory & Cognition. Both Mickes and Wixted agree that additional experiments are needed before these findings can be applied broadly, largely due to the lack of diversity among the study subjects.

Still, the implications are profound. Marketing firms could use Facebook-like advertisements to increase brand recognition. Teachers, too, might incorporate shorter, more colloquial sentences on study guides and in textbooks to raise test scores. The applications could be extensive: "I think there are implications for the way we teach, for how we advertise, how we generally communicate," Mickes says. "There are already professors who are into tech who have incorporated social media into their classrooms."

According to the study, Facebook users in total post more than 30 million times per hour. Whether it’s easier on the brain, that's a lot to remember.

Mollie Bloudoff-Indelicato is an environmental reporting fellow at E&E Publishing, covering the impact of climate change on everything from the international chocolate industry to methane hydrates in Antarctica. She has a master's degree from the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism with concentrations in science journalism and radio reporting. She is searching for a full-time position with a science-oriented publication that is interested in developing their social media presence and expanding their multimedia department. Contact her at news@mbloudoff.com, and follow her on Twitter at @mbloudoff.

More by Mollie Bloudoff-Indelicato

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe