Literature DB >> 24425424

Relational and item-specific influences on generate-recognize processes in recall.

Melissa J Guynn1, Mark A McDaniel, Garrett L Strosser, Juan M Ramirez, Erica H Castleberry, Kristen H Arnett.   

Abstract

The generate-recognize model and the relational-item-specific distinction are two approaches to explaining recall. In this study, we consider the two approaches in concert. Following Jacoby and Hollingshead (Journal of Memory and Language 29:433-454, 1990), we implemented a production task and a recognition task following production (1) to evaluate whether generation and recognition components were evident in cued recall and (2) to gauge the effects of relational and item-specific processing on these components. An encoding task designed to augment item-specific processing (anagram-transposition) produced a benefit on the recognition component (Experiments 1-3) but no significant benefit on the generation component (Experiments 1-3), in the context of a significant benefit to cued recall. By contrast, an encoding task designed to augment relational processing (category-sorting) did produce a benefit on the generation component (Experiment 3). These results converge on the idea that in recall, item-specific processing impacts a recognition component, whereas relational processing impacts a generation component.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24425424     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-013-0341-6

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


  21 in total

1.  The effects of levels-of-processing and organization on conceptual implicit memory in the category exemplar production test.

Authors:  N W Mulligan; P S Guyer; A Beland
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-07

2.  Evaluation of six multinomial models of conscious and unconscious processes with the recall-recognition paradigm.

Authors:  Francis S Bellezza
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Subjective organization in free recall of "unrelated" words.

Authors:  E TULVING
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1962-07       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Recollective and Nonrecollective Recall.

Authors:  C J Brainerd; V F Reyna
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  Does organization improve priming?

Authors:  V A Rappold; S Hashtroudi
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Dissociating the generation stage in implicit and explicit memory tests: Incidental production can differ from strategic access.

Authors:  M S Weldon; H L Colston
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  1995-09

7.  Accessing the particular from the general: the power of distinctiveness in the context of organization.

Authors:  R R Hunt; R E Smith
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1996-03

8.  The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on implicit memory, explicit memory, and memory for source.

Authors:  N W Mulligan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  The effects of data-driven and conceptually driven generation of study items on direct and indirect measures of memory.

Authors:  P Flory; L Pring
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1995-02

10.  On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning.

Authors:  L L Jacoby; M Dallas
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  1981-09
View more
  2 in total

1.  Saccade-induced retrieval enhancement and the recovery of perceptual item-specific information.

Authors:  Andrew Parker; Jolyon Poole; Neil Dagnall
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2019-12-16

2.  Category cued recall evokes a generate-recognize retrieval process.

Authors:  R Reed Hunt; Rebekah E Smith; Jeffrey P Toth
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 3.051

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.