Literature DB >> 25035187

Not enough familiarity for fluency: definitional encoding increases familiarity but does not lead to fluency attribution in associative recognition.

Marianne E Lloyd1, Ashley Hartman, Chi T Ngo, Nicole Ruser, Deanne L Westerman, Jeremy K Miller.   

Abstract

Five experiments were conducted to test whether encoding manipulations thought to encourage unitization would affect fluency attribution in associative recognition memory. Experiments 1a and 1b, which utilized a speeded recognition memory test, demonstrated that definitional encoding increased reliance on familiarity during the recognition memory test. Experiments 2a, 2b, and 3, however, replicated previous research that had shown that fluency is unlikely to be attributed as evidence of previous occurrence in associative recognition (Westerman, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 27:723-732, 2001). The results put limits on the degree to which fluency can influence recognition memory judgments, even in cases of enhanced familiarity, and are consistent with previous work suggesting that participants have preexperimental expectations about fluency that are difficult to change (e.g., Miller, Lloyd, & Westerman, Journal of Memory and Language 58:1080-1094, 2008), as well as with work suggesting that fluency has less of an influence on recognition memory decisions that are conceptual in nature (Parks, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 39:1280-1286, 2013).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25035187     DOI: 10.3758/s13421-014-0449-3

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


  23 in total

1.  Familiarity and recollection in item and associative recognition.

Authors:  W E Hockley; A Consoli
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1999-07

2.  Implicit/explicit memory versus analytic/nonanalytic processing: rethinking the mere exposure effect.

Authors:  B W Whittlesea; J R Price
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-03

3.  Dual-process theory and signal-detection theory of recognition memory.

Authors:  John T Wixted
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 8.934

4.  Processing fluency affects subjective claims of recollection.

Authors:  Bran P Kurilla; Deanne L Westerman
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-01

5.  Recognition memory for one-trial-unitized word pairs: evidence from event-related potentials.

Authors:  Regine Bader; Axel Mecklinger; Michael Hoppstädter; Patric Meyer
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 6.  The porous boundaries between explicit and implicit memory: behavioral and neural evidence.

Authors:  Ilana T Z Dew; Roberto Cabeza
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 5.691

7.  Transfer-appropriate processing in recognition memory: perceptual and conceptual effects on recognition memory depend on task demands.

Authors:  Colleen M Parks
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2012-12-10       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  Reducing the familiarity of conjunction lures with pictures.

Authors:  Marianne E Lloyd
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  The role of familiarity in associative recognition of unitized compound word pairs.

Authors:  Fahad N Ahmad; William E Hockley
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2014-06-11       Impact factor: 2.143

10.  The effects of unitization on familiarity-based source memory: testing a behavioral prediction derived from neuroimaging data.

Authors:  Rachel A Diana; Andrew P Yonelinas; Charan Ranganath
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.051

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.