On obtaining episodic priming in a lexical decision task following paired-associate learning

In four experiments, subjects made lexical (word-nonword) decisions to target letter strings after studying paired associates. In this lexical decision test, word targets previously studied as response terms in the paired associates were preceded at a 150-ms and/or 950-ms stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) by one of various subsets of the following six types of primes: a neutral (XXX or ready) prime, a semantically unrelated word prime episodically related to the target through its having been previously studied in the same pair, a semantically related word prime previously studied in a pair with some other unrelated word, a semantically unrelated word prime previously studied in a pair with some other unrelated word, a nonstudied semantically related word prime, and a nonstudied semantically unrelated word prime. At the 950-ms SOA, facilitation of lexical decisions produced by the episodically related primes was greater in test lists in which there were no 150-ms SOA trials intermixed, no previously studied semantically related primes, and no studied nonword targets. At the 150-ms SOA, facilitation from episodic priming was greater in test lists in which there were no semantically related primes and all studied word targets and no studied nonword targets. Facilitation effects from semantically related primes were small in magnitude and occurred inconsistently. Discussion focused on the implications these results have for the episodic-semantic memory distinction and the automaticity of episodic and semantic priming effects.     

Part-set cueing and the generation effect: An evaluation of a two-mechanism account of part-set cueing

The part-set cueing effect refers to paradoxical memory impairment often observed when elements from a set of items appear as ostensibly helpful retrieval cues during testing of memory for the set. We tested predictions of a two-mechanism account of part-set cueing—that, without enhanced relational processing, standard encoding leaves items susceptible to cueing-induced inhibition that persists after cues are removed; and that increasing item-specific encoding increases this persisting inhibition. Experiment 1 used antonym generation during study to increase item-specific encoding relative to standard encoding. Tests using item-specific probes revealed greater cueing-induced impairment for the generation condition, as predicted. However, when part-set cues were later removed, this impairment abated significantly in the generation condition and even disappeared in the standard-encoding condition—effects not predicted by the two-mechanism account, challenging its completeness. In Experiment 2, we ruled out an artifactual explanation of these results by replicating previously reported persisting impairment on free recall tests.     

The joint influence of collaboration and part-set cueing

The present study was designed to examine the effects of retrieval cues on memory performance for both individuals and collaborating pairs. Participants worked either alone or together in the presence or absence of part-set cues to recall list items in Experiments 1 and 2 and to reconstruct the order of a list items in Experiment 3. The detrimental effects of collaborative inhibition were observed across all three experiments. In contrast, part-set cueing inhibition was found following free recall, whereas part-set cueing facilitation was observed on reconstruction tasks. Taken together, the results of the present experiments suggest that the effects of collaborative inhibition and part-set cueing may operate independently of one another.     

Metacognition and part-set cuing: Can interference be predicted at retrieval?

Although prior research has examined predictions of memory performance under conditions of interference at encoding, predictions of memory performance have not been examined for interference introduced via cues at retrieval. This was investigated in the present study by exposing participants to a random subset of to-be-recalled items just prior to retrieval (part-set cuing) and then eliciting an overall prediction of memory performance. Across three experiments, participants in part-set cuing conditions recalled proportionally fewer items than did participants who were not exposed to any cues. However, participants were unable to predict the detrimental effect of part-set cues on memory performance in either a semantic (Experiment 1) or an episodic (Experiment 2) memory task. Predictions were better calibrated after practice with part-set cuing, and there was evidence that prior experience with part-set cuing transferred to predictions made for a different part-set cuing task (Experiment 3). This suggests that only under some conditions are participants sensitive to the diminished accessibility of memories wrought by part-set cues and illustrates situations in which participants are or are not aware of variables at retrieval that influence memory performance.     

Effects of the timing and identity of retrieval cues in individual recall: an attempt to mimic cross-cueing in collaborative recall

Inhibitory effects in collaborative recall have been attributed to cross-cueing among partners, in the same way that part-set cues are known to impair recall in individuals. However, studies of part-set cueing in individuals typically involve presenting cues visually at the start of recall, whereas cross-cueing in collaboration is likely to be spoken and distributed over time. In an attempt to bridge this gap, three experiments investigated effects of presenting spoken part-set or extra-list cues at different times during individual recall. Cues had an inhibitory effect on recollection in the early part of the recall period, especially when presented in immediate succession at the start of recall. There was no difference between the effects of part-set and extra-list cues under these presentation conditions. However, more inhibition was generated by part-set than extra-list cues when cue presentation was distributed throughout recall. These results are interpreted as suggesting that cues presented during recall disrupt memory in two ways, corresponding to either blocking or modifying retrieval processes. Implications for explaining and possibly ameliorating inhibitory effects in collaborative recall are discussed.     

Intention formation induces episodic inhibition of distracting stimuli

In two experiments we show that (a) distracting stimuli are inhibited after intention formation, (b) this inhibition is episodic rather than semantic in nature, and (c) inhibition of distracting stimuli is terminated once intentions are completed. In both experiments participants were asked to form an intention to press the space bar in response to six cues (i.e. intention cues). After intention formation we measured accessibility of intention cues, of words that are semantically related to the intention cues (i.e. related cues) and of semantically unrelated words (i.e. control cues). In Experiment 1, we obtained slower responses towards related cues compared with both intention cues and control cues in a recognition task, but not in a lexical decision task. In Experiment 2, we showed that inhibition of related cues is terminated after intention completion. Together these results are consistent with theorizing that inhibition of distracting (i.e. related) stimuli is functional for completing previously formed intentions, and give insight in the nature of inhibitory processes during goal pursuit.     

Effects of the timing and identity of retrieval cues in individual recall: An attempt to mimic cross-cueing in collaborative recall

Inhibitory effects in collaborative recall have been attributed to cross-cueing among partners, in the same way that part-set cues are known to impair recall in individuals. However, studies of part-set cueing in individuals typically involve presenting cues visually at the start of recall, whereas cross-cueing in collaboration is likely to be spoken and distributed over time. In an attempt to bridge this gap, three experiments investigated effects of presenting spoken part-set or extra-list cues at different times during individual recall. Cues had an inhibitory effect on recollection in the early part of the recall period, especially when presented in immediate succession at the start of recall. There was no difference between the effects of part-set and extra-list cues under these presentation conditions. However, more inhibition was generated by part-set than extra-list cues when cue presentation was distributed throughout recall. These results are interpreted as suggesting that cues presented during recall disrupt memory in two ways, corresponding to either blocking or modifying retrieval processes. Implications for explaining and possibly ameliorating inhibitory effects in collaborative recall are discussed.     

No retrieval-induced forgetting using item-specific independent cues: evidence against a general inhibitory account

Retrieval practice with particular items from memory can impair the recall of related items on a later memory test. This retrieval-induced forgetting effect has been ascribed to inhibitory processes (M. C. Anderson & B. A. Spellman, 1995). A critical finding that distinguishes inhibitory from interference explanations is that forgetting is found with independent (or extralist) cues. In 4 experiments, the authors tested whether the forgetting effect is cue-independent. Forgetting was investigated for both studied and unstudied semantically related items. Retrieval-induced forgetting was not found using item-specific independent cues for either studied or unstudied items. However, forgetting was found for both item types when studied categories were used as cues. These results are not in line with a general inhibitory account, because this account predicts retrieval-induced forgetting with independent cues. Interference and context-specific inhibition are discussed as possible explanations for the data.     

Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences

The effect of semantic priming upon lexical decisions made for words in isolation (Experiment 1) and during sentence comprehension (Experiment 2) was investigated using a cross-modal lexical decision task. In Experiment 1, subjects made lexical decisions to both auditory and visual stimuli. Processing auditorily presented words facilitated subsequent lexical decisions on semantically related visual words. In Experiment 2, subjects comprehended auditorily presented sentences while simultaneously making lexical decisions for visually presented stimuli. Lexical decisions were facilitated when a visual word appeared immediately following a related word in the sentential material. Lexical decisions were also facilitated when the visual word appeared three syllables following closure of the clause containing the related material. Arguments are made for autonomy of semantic priming during sentence comprehension.     

Context and lexical access: implications of nonword interference for lexical ambiguity resolution

To eliminate potential "backward" priming effects, Glucksberg, Kreuz, and Rho (1986) introduced a variant of the cross-modal lexical priming task in which subjects made lexical decisions to nonword targets that were modeled on a word related to either the contextually biased or unbiased sense of an ambiguous word. Lexical decisions to nonwords were longer than controls only when the nonword was related to the contextually biased sense of the ambiguous word, leading Glucksberg et al. to conclude that context does constrain lexical access and that the multiple access pattern observed in previous studies was probably an artifact of backward priming. We did not find nonword interference when the nonword targets used by Glucksberg et al. were preceded by semantically related ambiguous or unambiguous word primes. However, we did replicate their sentence context results when the ambiguous words were removed from the sentences. We conclude that the interference obtained by Glucksberg et al. is due to postlexical judgements of the congruence of the sentence context and the target, not to context constraining lexical access.     

The influence of context on lexical decision times for emotionally aversive words

Forty-eight undergraduates made lexical decisions about emotionally aversive and nonemotional words. Emotionally aversive target words were preceded either by an emotionally aversive prime word, a nonemotional but semantically related prime or a nonemotional and semantically unrelated prime. Nonemotional targets were preceded by nonemotional primes which were either semantically related to targets, unrelated, or neutral (strings of Xs). Primes were presented for 50 ms to one group of 16 participants, 500 ms to a second group and 1250 ms to a third group. Measurement of lexical decision time showed significant semantic primary effects for nonemotional targets, and these were not influenced by prime duration. Priming effects for emotionally aversive targets due both to emotional and nonemotional relatedness of primes and targets were also found and these effects were not influenced by prime duration. The results are considered to be consistent with Bower’s (1981) associative network theory of memory, and possible clinical implications for explaining spontaneous panic attacks and the incubation of anxiety are discussed.     

Part-set cueing impairment & facilitation in semantic memory

The present study explored the influence of part-set cues in semantic memory using tests of “free” recall, reconstruction of order, and serial recall. Nine distinct categories of information were used (e.g., Zodiac signs, Harry Potter books, Star Wars films, planets). The results showed part-set cueing impairment for all three “free” recall sets, whereas part-set cueing facilitation was evident for five of the six ordered sets. Generally, the present results parallel those often observed across episodic tasks, which could indicate that similar mechanisms contribute to part-set cueing effects in both episodic and semantic memory. A novel anchoring explanation of part-set cueing facilitation in order and spatial tasks is provided.     

Mental representations of spatial and nonspatial relations

Four experiments investigated the representation and integration in memory of spatial and nonspatial relations. Subjects learned two-dimensional spatial arrays in which critical pairs of object names were semantically related (Experiment 1), semantically and episodically related (Experiment 2), or just episodically related (Experiments 3a and 3b). Episodic relatedness was established in a paired-associate learning task that preceded array learning. After learning an array, subjects participated in two tasks: item recognition, in which the measure of interest was priming; and distance estimation. Priming in item recognition was sensitive to the Euclidean distance between object names and, for neighbouring locations, to nonspatial relations. Errors in distance estimations varied as a function of distance but were unaffected by nonspatial relations. These and other results indicated that nonspatial relations influenced the probability of encoding spatial relations between locations but did not lead to distorted spatial memories.     

Sublexical and Lexical Influences on Gender Assignment in French

Two experiments showed that French native speakers rely on sublexical and lexical cues to allocate gender during word recognition. Sublexical cues were based on whether the word ending was typical for a particular gender rather than neutral with regard to gender. Lexical cues were based on whether the associated definite article was informative (for words beginning with a consonant) or uninformative (for words beginning with a vowel). Classification of single nouns and verification of grammatical combinations of indefinite article and noun led to longer times when both sublexical and lexical cues were uninformative compared with when one or both cues were informative. Verification of ungrammatical combinations of indefinite article and noun yielded separate effects of both cues, though only when monitoring for both semantic and syntactic unacceptability in meaningful phrases did people attend to both cues independently. It was argued that people became more cautious in their gender assignments as task requirements became deeper. If strategic changes as a function of task demands are incorporated, the results are compatible with connectionist models proposing that gender decisions are computed from strength of past associations of the word and gender-specifying elements.     

The effect of asymmetrical association on positive and negative semantic priming

One's actively ignoring a stimulus can impair subsequent responding to that stimulus. This negative priming effect has been argued to generalize to semantically related items as well, but the evidence for this is still somewhat weak. This article presents a new experiment in which participants made lexical decisions to asymmetrically associated prime-target pairs presented in either the forward (e.g., stork-baby) or backward (e.g., baby-stork) direction. The critical new finding was that both attended positive and ignored negative semantic priming occurred only for prime-target pairs presented in the forward direction. The results support either (1) a spreading inhibition model in which items associated with an ignored distractor are inhibited during prime selection or (2) a version of episodic retrieval theory in which the prime distractor and items associated with it are tagged as "to-be-ignored" during prime selection.     

Gesture Helps,Only If You Need It: Inhibiting Gesture Reduces Tip-of-the-Tongue Resolution for Those With Weak Short-Term Memory

People frequently gesture when a word is on the tip of their tongue (TOT), yet research is mixed as to whether and why gesture aids lexical retrieval. We tested three accounts: the lexical retrieval hypothesis, which predicts that semantically related gestures facilitate successful lexical retrieval; the cognitive load account, which predicts that matching gestures facilitate lexical retrieval only when retrieval is hard, as in the case of a TOT; and the motor movement account, which predicts that any motor movements should support lexical retrieval. In Experiment 1 (a between-subjects study; N = 90), gesture inhibition, but not neck inhibition, affected TOT resolution but not overall lexical retrieval; participants in the gesture-inhibited condition resolved fewer TOTs than participants who were allowed to gesture. When participants could gesture, they produced more representational gestures during resolved than unresolved TOTs, a pattern not observed for meaningless motor movements (e.g., beats). However, the effect of gesture inhibition on TOT resolution was not uniform; some participants resolved many TOTs, while others struggled. In Experiment 2 (a within-subjects study; N = 34), the effect of gesture inhibition was traced to individual differences in verbal, not spatial short-term memory (STM) span; those with weaker verbal STM resolved fewer TOTs when unable to gesture. This relationship between verbal STM and TOT resolution was not observed when participants were allowed to gesture. Taken together, these results fit the cognitive load account; when lexical retrieval is hard, gesture effectively reduces the cognitive load of TOT resolution for those who find the task especially taxing.     

Part—set cuing of order information: Implications for associative theories of serial order memory

In three experiments, the effect of cuing, at the point of test, on memory for order and/or position was investigated. Experiment 1 used a partial reconstruction of order task to demonstrate a mnemonic benefit of part-set cuing at the time of test; this result is used to argue that people may commonly use interitem associative information, rather than just position information, to help them remember serial order. Experiment 2 replicated these findings and simultaneously demonstrated the mnemonic detriment that part-set cuing typically produces in free recall. Experiment 3 showed that cues presented at test will either help or hinder reconstruction of order, depending on whether those cues are consistent or inconsistent with the original presentation order. The results of all three experiments are discussed within the framework of position and associative theories of serial order memory.     

How semantic is automatic semantic priming?

Priming for semantically related concepts was investigated using a lexical decision task designed to reveal automatic semantic priming. Two experiments provided further evidence that priming in a single presentation lexical decision task (McNamara & Altarriba, 1988) derives from automatic processes. Mediated priming, but no inhibition or backward priming was found in this type of lexical decision task. Experiments 3 and 4 demonstrated that automatic priming was found only for associated word pairs, as determined by word association norms, and not for word pairs that are semantically related but not associated. It is argued that automatic priming in the lexical decision task occurs at a lexical level not at a semantic level.     

Are words represented by nodes?

Semantic priming in a lexical decision task was investigated with concurrent pretarget and posttarget primes. The posttarget prime also served as a pattern mask of the lexical decision target. Forward priming is defined as the presence of a semantically related pretarget prime and an unrelated posttarget prime. Backward priming is defined as the presence of a semantically related posttarget prime and an unrelated pretarget prime. Forward and backward priming were compared both when the nonword foils were "legal" and when they were "illegal" with respect to English orthography. Predictions were derived for two general approaches to word recognition: spreading-activation and expectancy-set theories. Both approaches assume that word representations occupy distinct, nonoverlapping locations in memory. Backward-prime facilitation was equivalent to forward-prime facilitation when nonword foils were illegal; however, backward-prime facilitation was not significant when nonword foils were legal. These results challenge both approaches. The proposed solution uses semantic-space (distributed) representations that are functionally unitized by a resonant matching (verification) process.     

When do nonwords activate semantics? Implications for models of visual word recognition

Three lexical decision experiments examined the conditions in which nonwords activate semantics. Lexical decisions to targets (e.g., CAT) were faster when preceded by semantically related nonword primes (e.g., DEG derived from DOG) when the prime was brief and masked; this nonword priming effect was eliminated when the prime was presented for a longer duration. These results are discussed in the context of both parallel distributed processing models and the idea that the occurrence of nonword priming depends upon subjects being unable to verify the identity of the prime.