Exceptions to recognition failure as a function of the encoded association between cue and target

The relation of the recognition failure of recallable words to overall recognition rates is largely invariant across conditions that influence both recall and recognition separately. In two experiments, the influence of the integration of the members of A-B word pairs on this relation was investigated. In Experiment 1, it was found that deviations of observed recognition failure from predictions of the Tulving-Wiseman function (Tulving & Wiseman, 1975) were produced by shallow, nonsemantic encoding. In Experiment 2, the association of category-to-instance pairs was varied. It was found that weak associates caused larger deviations of observed recognition failure from predicted recognition failure than did strong associates. Such results suggest that a strongly encoded association between cue and target elements of A-B pairs is a necessary condition for the adherence of data to the Tulving-Wiseman function. The implications of these findings for general models of memory are discussed.     

Item-specific effects in recognition failure: Reasons for rejection of the Tulving-Wiseman function

The present paper addresses the problems of whether recognition failure of recallable words is a function of both recognition and recall, and whether recognition failure is restricted to a small and specifiable subset of study items. A meta-analysis of the Nilsson—Gardiner database (Nilsson & Gardiner, 1993) showed that recognition given recall was positively correlated with recognition and negatively correlated with recall. Two new experiments are reported, the first one using 48 word pairs for which recognition failure was found in previous studies. An item analysis of the data demonstrated that recognition failure occurred primarily with noun—adjective pairs. The second experiment compared Norwegian—American and American—Norwegian name pairs. Wide deviation from the Tulving—Wiseman function (Tulving & Wiseman, 1975) was observed for the latter condition. In both conditions, recognition failure occurred with only the items for which the beginnings of names shared three or more letters. It is concluded that recognition failure occurs when there exists a relationship between the members of an A—B pair that is independent of their pairing in the study context. The Tulving—Wiseman function is the result of collapsing across items in the analysis of previous studies.     

A direct comparison of recognition failure rates for recallable names in episodic and semanticmemory tests

In an extension of Muter’s (1978) research, subjects studied pairs of lowercase cues and uppercase targets consisting of famous names (e.g., betsy ROSS), nonfamous names (e.g., edwin CONWAY), weakly related words (e.g., grasp BABY), and unrelated words (e.g., art GO). Following recognition tests in which surname and word targets were tested in the absence of their cues, cued recall tests for the surname and word targets were given. In semantic recognition and recall tests, the response to a surname was to be made solely on the basis of its fame, regardless of whether or not it had appeared in the study list. In episodic memory tests, the response to a surname was to be made solely on the basis of whether or not it had appeared in the study list, regardless of its fame. In all tests, the response to a nonname was to be made solely on the basis of whether or not it had appeared in the study list. The Tulving-Wiseman (1975) function accurately predicted recognition failure rates for famous surnames, whether or not they were from the study list and whether the test was episodic or semantic, and for targets from the weakly relatedword pairs. However, recognition failure rates were lower than the Tulving-Wiseman function predicted for nonfamous surnames in the episodic memory test and for targets from unrelated word pairs. Discussion focused on these results’ implications for the nature of the Tulving-Wiseman function and the psychological reality of the episodic-semantic memory distinction.     

Associative asymmetry in probed recall of serial lists

For pairs of meaningful items (e.g., words), recall accuracy is nearly identical for forward and backward probes. That is, after studying an A-B pair, subjects can recall A given B as well as they can recall B given A (Kahana, 2002). To assess whether this symmetry property is unique to pairs, we investigated the effects of study direction on probed recall of word triples and serial lists. Two experiments revealed a forward-recall advantage in both triples and serial lists. In addition, compound cues produced better recall than did single-item adjacent cues, which, in turn, produced better recall than did remote cues. These findings suggest a discontinuity between the associative processes supporting memory for pairs and those supporting memory for sequences of three or more items.     

基于熟悉性的项目间语义关系再认

在项目间语义关系的熟悉性研究中, 一个关键问题是熟悉性效应依赖于哪种信息的加工, 关系概念还是抽象结构?研究通过两个实验, 借助无线索回忆再认范式(the recognition without cued recall paradigm, 简称RWCR范式)和四词类比材料, 采用混合设计, 直接分离与比较关系概念和抽象结构的加工对RWCR效应的影响。结果发现, 关系概念作为测验线索能够引发显著RWCR效应, 但仅仅学习关系概念却不能;只有学习关系概念的结构化材料时, 才能引发显著RWCR效应。该结果表明, 项目间语义关系的熟悉性过程与结构信息有关。     

The generation effect and the modeling of associations in memory

The search of associative memory (SAM) model of Gillund and Shiffrin (1984) was applied to data of two experiments that examined the generation effect (Slamecka & Graf, 1978). Subjects studied a list of related word pairs, in which they either read both words in the pair or generated the righthand response term using the left-hand stimulus term plus the response word fragment as generation cues. Experiment 1 manipulated encoding condition within subjects and used an incidental learning procedure. Experiment 2 manipulated encoding condition between subjects and used an intentional learning procedure. Memory was tested with recognition, cued recall, and free recall. A higher order association model gave a better and more parsimonious fit to the results than did an item-level association model. The relationship between various versions of SAM and current accounts of the generation effect are discussed, particularly the two-factor theory of Hirshman and Bjork (1988).     

Encoding specificity revisited: the role of semantics.

Three experiments examined the effects of semantic characteristics of word pairs on memory using the encoding specificity paradigm. The paradigm involved four phases: (a) an encoding phase to relate cues and targets, (b) a phase in which words were generated to new cues, (c) a phase for recognition of generated targets, and (d) a cued-recall phase using the original encoding cues. Encoding pairs were classified a priori as either semantically similar (e.g., alluring-PRETTY), semantically contrasting (e.g., drab-PRETTY), or semantically unrelated (e.g., sore-PRETTY). Generation pairs were classified a priori as either semantically similar (e.g., beautiful-PRETTY) or semantically contrasting (e.g., ugly-PRETTY). For recall, the results showed that both the semantic relations between the encoding cue and target and the reprovision of the encoding cue at retrieval were important factors. In the case of recognition, however, both the semantic congruence between the encoding and generation contexts and the amount of semantic elaboration provided by the encoding context were important factors.     

Korsakoff amnesic syndrome: The result of simultaneous deficits in several independent processes?

Alcoholic Korsakoff patients were presented six verbal list learning tasks (two denotatively and three connotatively organized, and one high-imagery word list). Twelve recall trials and three recognition probes were obtained per list. Results indicate that for Korsakoff patients, (1) recall varied with list organization, (2) recognition memory although poor was further disrupted by proactive inhibition only on denotatively categorized lists, and (3) conceptual deficits disrupted ability to appreciate simple dichotomies in denotatively categorized lists. It is hypothesized that the joint presence of deficts in specific conceptual and semantic processes in necessary although perhaps not sufficient to produce a Korsakoff amnesia.     

The role of integration in recognition failure and action memory

In three experiments, we studied memory for action events with respect to exceptions from the Tulving-Wiseman function demonstrated in experiments on recognition failure of recallable words. In Experiment 1, we examined exceptions of poor integration in a regular recognition failure condition (i.e., recognition of targets without contextual cues, followed by recall of targets in the presence of contextual cues). In Experiment 2, we examined exceptions of cue overlap in which subjects also had access to the information of contextual cues at recognition test. In Experiment 3, we attempted to equate the levels of recognition across the action and verbal encoding. In addition, the cue overlap and no-cue overlap conditions were studied in a within-subjects design. Results from the three experiments indicated that encoding enactment (episodic integration) and conceptual integration (semantic integration) are related to each other. As a consequence of this relationship, there is a larger independence between recognition and recall of well-integrated items with encoding enactment. On the other hand, for the poorly integrated items without encoding enactment, there is a larger dependence between recognition and recall. Even in the cue overlap condition, where there is a case of large dependence between recognition and recall, the same pattern of data was observed. The results are discussed in terms of an episodic integration view of encoding enactment.     

Diagnosing criterion-level effects on memory: what aspects of memory are enhanced by repeated retrieval?

Previous research has shown that increasing the criterion level (i.e., the number of times an item must be correctly retrieved during practice) improves subsequent memory, but which specific components of memory does increased criterion level enhance? In two experiments, we examined the extent to which the criterion level affects associative memory, target memory, and cue memory. Participants studied Lithuanian-English word pairs via cued recall with restudy until items were correctly recalled one to five times. In Experiment 1, participants took one of four recall tests and one of three recognition tests after a 2-day delay. In Experiment 2, participants took only recognition tests after a 1-week delay. In both experiments, increasing the criterion level enhanced associative memory, as indicated by enhanced performance on forward and backward cued-recall tests and on tests of associative recognition. An increased criterion level also improved target memory, as indicated by enhanced free recall and recognition of targets, and improved cue memory, as indicated by enhanced free recall and recognition of cues.     

Primacy and recency in primed free association and associative cued recall

Two experiments compared the serial positions of primed words in an implicit free association test with words recalled in a cued recall test. In both tests, weakly or strongly related word pairs were studied, and the first words of each pair formed the test cues. In the implicit test, weakly related words pairs showed primacy and extended recency effects but strongly related word pairs did not. In the explicit test, both weakly and strongly related word pairs showed primacy and extended recency effects. These functional dissociations between implicit and explicit memory tests indicate that strongly related word pairs are encoded together because they have unitized memory representations that function as integrated units without requiring any additional associative links to be made, but that an additional system or process is required to strengthen weakly related word pairs during encoding. In addition, a further additional system or process is accessed by explicit retrieval.     

Effects of encoding instructions and retrieval cuing on recall in Korsakoff patients

The relationship between the depth of encoding a word and its subsequent recall, either cued or noncued, was investigated in this study. In Experiment 1, Korsakoff subjects and alcoholic controls were shown a categorized word list under one of three different encoding instructions: (1) nonsemantic, that is, detecting the presence or absence of the letter “e” in each word, (2)semantic, that is, assigning words to their correct taxonomic category, and (3) no encoding instructions. Semantic encoding instructions resulted in higher recall for both diagnostic groups than the other instructions. In Experiment 2, subjects were again assigned to one of the three encoding instructions as in Experiment 1, but all groups received cues (category labels) at the time of recall. Cuing increased recall for all but the group receiving instructions to encode nonsemantically. Experiment 3 was a replication of the previous experiments. The results indicated that Korsakoff subjects were capable of encoding semantically without specific instructions to do so but were impaired in the ability to generate retrieval cues at the time of recall.     

Word frequency effects in associative and item recognition

The word frequency effect (WFE) has been taken as evidence that recall and recognition are in some way fundamentally different. Consequently, most models assume that recall and recognition operate via very different retrieval mechanisms. Experiment 1 showed that the WFE reverses for associative recognition, which requires discrimination between intact test pairs and recombinations of study list words from different study pairs. Experiment 2, in which word triples were used, revealed an interaction between word frequency and test type: for item recognition, performance was better for low-frequency words; however, for associative recognition and free recall, performance was better for high-frequency words. In Experiment 3, item recognition was tested: although overall performance was better for low-frequency words, the recognition advantage for items in intact pairs was larger for high-frequency words, suggesting two components in recognition memory. These results imply common mechanisms in recall and recognition. Theoretical implications are discussed within the framework of the SAM model.     

Age differences in collaborative memory: the role of retrieval manipulations

In two experiments, we examined age differences in collaborative inhibition (reduced recall in pairs of people, relative to pooled individuals) across repeated retrieval attempts. Younger and older adults studied categorized word lists and were then given two consecutive recall tests and a recognition test. On the first recall test, the subjects were given free-report cued recall or forced-report cued recall instructions (Experiment 1) or free recall instructions (Experiment 2) and recalled the lists either alone or in collaboration with another subject of the same age group. Free-report cued recall and free recall instructions warned the subjects not to guess, whereas forcedreport cued recall instructions required them to guess. Collaborative inhibition was obtained for both younger and older adults on initial tests of free-report cued recall, forced-report cued recall, and free recall, showing that the effect generalizes across several tests for both younger and older adults. Collaborative inhibition did not persist on subsequent individual recall or recognition tests for list items. Older adults consistently falsely recalled and recognized items more than did younger adults, as had been found in previous studies. In addition, prior collaboration may exaggerate older adults’ tendency toward higher false alarms on a subsequent recognition test, but only after a free recall test. The results provide generality to the phenomenon of collaborative inhibition and can be explained by invoking concepts of strategy disruption and source monitoring.     

Maintenance rehearsal: the key to the role attention plays in storage and forgetting

Research with the maintenance-rehearsal paradigm, in which word pairs are rehearsed as distractor material during a series of digit recall trials, has previously indicated that low frequency and new word pairs capture attention to a greater degree than high frequency and old word pairs. This impacts delayed recognition of the pairs and interferes with immediate digit recall. The effect on immediate digit recall may provide the missing converging evidence for the role of attention in memory. In the current study, 3 experiments were conducted to further investigate the role of attention capture and novelty in storage and forgetting. In addition to the previously established effects, the novelty of switching rehearsal between 2 pairs was found to impair both digit recall and memory for the first pair. The attentional effects we obtained were dependent upon participant expectation, and forgetting appears to be due to interference with consolidation rather than decay or traditional associative interference. Finally, the attentional effects we observed in associative recognition were primarily reflected in a lowering of the false alarm rate with increases in the strength of the parent pairs. Although dual-process models can accommodate this finding on the assumption that recollection is invoked at test alongside familiarity, we showed that the level of recall in this paradigm is so small that recollection can be ruled out. Accordingly, our results are challenging for the existing models of associative recognition to accommodate.     

Retrieval in cued recall

Three experiments examined retrieval in a cued recall paradigm by manipulating the pattern of output cues. In the first two experiments, subjects were paced through recall of a categorized list by recalling one word at a time in response to a category name as a retrieval cue. The pattern of these output cues exerted a strong influence on performance. Subjects recalled considerably more when the cues were blocked by category than when required to recall successive words from different categories. This output effect increased over trials, and was interpreted in terms of a model in which subjects develop a retrieval strategy that can be interfered with by the circumstances of output. The last experiment contrasted structural and strategy models in a hierarchical recall paradigm. Subjects were given a set of postinput recall cues that either made evident the hierarchical structure of the input list or contained the same cue words but with no hierarchical information. Information about the hierarchical structure improved performance even when provided only during recall. The data were discuss in terms of recent models of recall, and a compromise was suggested.     

The negative generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon

In four experiments employing between-list designs, generation was found to have negative effects on free recall of word pairs and on cued recall of the second word. In addition, generation had negative effects on measures of word-pair integration and on clustering in recall. In contrast, positive effects of generation were found on free recall of second words alone, and on a recognition test for memory of the second word. It was concluded that in between-list designs, generation led to greater individual-item processing of the generated term than reading, but this processing occurred at the expense of processing the relation between the words in a pair and processing the relations between different pairs in a list.     

Detecting analogical resemblance without retrieving the source analogy

We examined whether people can detect analogical resemblance to an earlier experimental episode without being able to recall the experimental source of the analogical resemblance. We used four-word analogies (e.g., robin-nest/beaver-dam), in a variation of the recognition-without-cued-recall method (Cleary, 2004). Participants studied word pairs (e.g., robin-nest) and were shown new word pairs at test, half of which analogically related to studied word pairs (e.g., beaver-dam) and half of which did not. For each test pair, participants first attempted to recall an analogically similar pair from the study list. Then, regardless of whether successful recall occurred, participants were prompted to rate the familiarity of the test pair, which was said to indicate the likelihood that a pair that was analogically similar to the test pair had been studied. Across three experiments, participants demonstrated an ability to detect analogical resemblance without recalling the source analogy. Findings are discussed in terms of their potential relevance to the study of analogical reasoning and insight, as well as to the study of familiarity and recognition memory.     

Memory deficits in early infantile autism: some similarities to the amnesic syndrome.

Autistic children were compared with control children on tasks in which retention was tested by different methods. In three tests of recall, using named pictures, written words and spoken words as test stimuli, autistic children were impaired in comparison with age-matched normal children and with controls matched for verbal ability. In one test of forced-choice recognition of pictures, autistic children were impaired in comparison with ability-matched controls. In three tests of cued recall, using named pictures, written words and spoken words as test stimuli, and acoustic, graphemic and semantic cues, autistic children were not impaired in comparison with normal age-matched controls. In one test of paired-associate learning using non-related word pairs as test stimuli autistic children were not impaired in comparison with normal age-matched controls. These experimental paradigms were similar to some that have been used to investigate the amnesic syndrome in man. Thus findings on paired-associate learning differ in autistic and amnesic subjects, but findings on recall, recognition and cued recall are comparable. A possible parallel between autism and amnesia is discussed.     

Semantic specificity in cued recall

In three cued recall experiments, extralist retrieval cues that were congruous in meaning to an encoded target pair of words produced better recall of the targets than wh6n the cuetarget relation was incongruous. However, this result, which differs from that of other experiments, depended in some cases on scoring recall of a target pair when either member of the pair was recalled. It is argued that (1) pairs of words are typically stored as higher order units, (2) the best test procedure is to request recall of both members of the pair when an extralist cue is presented, and (3) semantic features provide an important dimension in the mnemonic representation of word events.