Literature DB >> 23180311

Top-down constraint on recognition memory.

Justin Kantner1, D Stephen Lindsay.   

Abstract

Can recognition memory be constrained "at the front end," such that people are more likely to retrieve information about studying a recognition-test probe from a specified target source than they are to retrieve such information about a probe from a nontarget source? We adapted a procedure developed by Jacoby, Shimizu, Daniels, and Rhodes (Psychonomic bulletin & review 12:852-857, 2005) to address this question. Experiment 1 yielded evidence of source-constrained retrieval, but that pattern was not significant in Experiments 2, 3, and 4 (nor in several unpublished pilot experiments). In experiment 5, in which items from the two studied sources were perceptibly different, a pattern consistent with front-end constraint of recognition emerged, but this constraint was likely exercised via visual attention rather than memory. Experiment 6 replicated both the absence of a significant constrained-retrieval pattern when the sources did not differ perceptibly (as in exps. 2, 3 and 4) and the presence of that pattern when they did differ perceptibly (as in exp. 5). Our results suggest that people can easily constrain recognition when items from the to-be-recognized source differ perceptibly from items from other sources (presumably via visual attention), but that it is difficult to constrain retrieval solely on the basis of source memory.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23180311     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0265-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mem Cognit        ISSN: 0090-502X


  20 in total

1.  Electrophysiological evidence for the modulation of retrieval orientation by depth of study processing.

Authors:  M D Rugg; K Allan; C S Birch
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation.

Authors:  Michael E J Masson
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2003-09

3.  Judgment of frequency versus recognition confidence: repetition and recursive reminding.

Authors:  Douglas L Hintzman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-03

4.  The next generation: the value of reminding.

Authors:  Colin M MacLeod; Molly M Pottruff; Noah D Forrin; Michael E J Masson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2012-07

5.  Electrophysiologically dissociating episodic preretrieval processing.

Authors:  Emma K Bridger; Axel Mecklinger
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2011-10-07       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 6.  Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: an integrative review.

Authors:  C M MacLeod
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  Modes of cognitive control in recognition and source memory: depth of retrieval.

Authors:  Larry L Jacoby; Yujiro Shimizu; Karen A Daniels; Matthew G Rhodes
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-10

8.  Neural correlates of individual differences in strategic retrieval processing.

Authors:  Emma K Bridger; Jane E Herron; Rachael L Elward; Edward L Wilding
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 9.  Research Strategy in the Study of Memory: Fads, Fallacies, and the Search for the "Coordinates of Truth".

Authors:  Douglas L Hintzman
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-05

10.  Multivoxel pattern analysis reveals increased memory targeting and reduced use of retrieved details during single-agenda source monitoring.

Authors:  Susan G R McDuff; Hillary C Frankel; Kenneth A Norman
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-01-14       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  5 in total

1.  Memory as discrimination: what distraction reveals.

Authors:  C Philip Beaman; Maciej Hanczakowski; Helen M Hodgetts; John E Marsh; Dylan M Jones
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2013-11

2.  Emotional Encoding Context Leads to Memory Bias in Individuals with High Anxiety.

Authors:  Christopher Lee; Myra A Fernandes
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2017-12-27

3.  Alpha Oscillations during Incidental Encoding Predict Subsequent Memory for New "Foil" Information.

Authors:  David A Vogelsang; Matthias Gruber; Zara M Bergström; Charan Ranganath; Jon S Simons
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Closing the door to false memory: the effects of levels-of-processing and stimulus type on the rejection of perceptually vs. semantically dissimilar distractors.

Authors:  Marek Nieznański; Michał Obidziński
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-06-10

5.  Goal-directed mechanisms that constrain retrieval predict subsequent memory for new "foil" information.

Authors:  David A Vogelsang; Heidi M Bonnici; Zara M Bergström; Charan Ranganath; Jon S Simons
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2016-07-16       Impact factor: 3.139

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.