Literature DB >> 24203753

Single-trace fragility theory of memory dynamics.

W A Wickelgren1.   

Abstract

In single-trace fragility theory, forgetting is produced by two factors, time and interference. Memory traces are assumed to have two partially coupled dynamic properties, strength and fragility. Strength determines the probability of correct recall and recognition, while fragility determines the susceptibility of the trace to the time-decay process but not to the interference process. Consolidation is assumed to be a continual reduction in the fragility of the memory trace rather than any change in strength or availability. Decreasing fragility accounts for the continually decreasing forgetting rate, the temporal character of retrograde amnesia and recovery therefrom, and the type of internal clock necessary for nonassociative recency judgments. Data are presented to indicate that interference is independent of the interval between original and interpolated learning, that nonassociative recency discriminability approaches a limit at about 30 min, and that the decay rate of long-term retention in amnesic patients is the same as in normal Ss.

Entities:  

Year:  1974        PMID: 24203753     DOI: 10.3758/BF03198154

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


  4 in total

1.  Loss of recent memory after bilateral hippocampal lesions.

Authors:  W B SCOVILLE; B MILNER
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  1957-02       Impact factor: 10.154

2.  Retroactive inhibition as a function of the temporal position of the interpolated learning.

Authors:  J M NEWTON; D D WICKENS
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1956-02

3.  Retroactive inhibition of verbal associations as a multiple function of temporal point of interpolation and degree of interpolated learning.

Authors:  E J ARCHER; B J UNDERWOOD
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1951-11

4.  Amnesic syndrome: consolidation or retrieval?

Authors:  E K Warrington; L Weiskrantz
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1970-11-14       Impact factor: 49.962

  4 in total
  32 in total

1.  Context matching and judgments of recency.

Authors:  Douglas L Hintzman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2002-06

2.  Why is it difficult to see in the fog? How stimulus contrast affects visual perception and visual memory.

Authors:  Erin M Harley; Allyss M Dillon; Geoffrey R Loftus
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-04

3.  Synaptic evidence for the efficacy of spaced learning.

Authors:  Enikö A Kramár; Alex H Babayan; Cristin F Gavin; Conor D Cox; Matiar Jafari; Christine M Gall; Gavin Rumbaugh; Gary Lynch
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 11.205

4.  Time versus items in judgment of recency.

Authors:  Douglas L Hintzman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2004-12

5.  Remembering the news: modeling retention data from a study with 14,000 participants.

Authors:  M Meeter; J M J Murre; S M J Janssen
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2005-07

6.  Alcoholic intoxication and memory storage dynamics.

Authors:  W A Wickelgren
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1975-07

7.  Memory strength and recency judgments.

Authors:  Douglas L Hintzman
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2005-10

Review 8.  What are the differences between long-term, short-term, and working memory?

Authors:  Nelson Cowan
Journal:  Prog Brain Res       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.453

9.  The effects of tests on learning and forgetting.

Authors:  Shana K Carpenter; Harold Pashler; John T Wixted; Edward Vul
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-03

10.  How does repetition affect memory? Evidence from judgments of recency.

Authors:  Douglas L Hintzman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2010-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.