Literature DB >> 26134415

Perceptual blurring and recognition memory: A desirable difficulty effect revealed.

Tamara M Rosner1, Hanae Davis2, Bruce Milliken2.   

Abstract

Recent research in the area of desirable difficulty--defined as processing difficulty at either encoding or retrieval that improves long-term retention--has demonstrated that perceptually blurring an item makes processing less fluent, but does not improve remembering (Yue et al., 2013). This result led us to examine more closely perceptual blurring as a potential desirable difficulty. In Experiment 1, better recognition of blurry than clear words was observed, a result that contrasts with those reported by Yue et al. This result was replicated in Experiment 2, in which both mixed-list and pure-list designs were used. The following experiments were conducted to determine when blurring does and does not result in enhanced remembering. The desirable difficulty effect observed in Experiments 1 and 2 was replicated in Experiments 3A, 3B, and 3C, despite varying encoding intent during study, context reinstatement at the time of test, study list length, and the nature of the distractor task between study and test phases. It was only in Experiments 4A and 4B that a null effect of perceptual blurring on remembering was found. These experiments demonstrated that (1) the level of blurring used is critical, with a lower blurring level producing results similar to Yue et al. (2013), and (2) the introduction of judgments of learning at the time of study eliminated the benefit of blurring on remembering. These results extend the desirable difficulty principle to encoding manipulations involving perceptual blurring, and identify judgments of learning at encoding as a powerful moderator of this particular desirable difficulty effect.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Desirable difficulty; Metamemory; Perceptual disfluency; Recognition

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26134415     DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.06.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)        ISSN: 0001-6918


  9 in total

1.  Would disfluency by any other name still be disfluent? Examining the disfluency effect with cursive handwriting.

Authors:  Jason Geller; Mary L Still; Veronica J Dark; Shana K Carpenter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-10

2.  Attentional influences on memory formation: A tale of a not-so-simple story.

Authors:  J Ortiz-Tudela; B Milliken; L Jiménez; J Lupiáñez
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-05

3.  Can very small font size enhance memory?

Authors:  Vered Halamish
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2018-08

4.  Memory effects of conflict and cognitive control are processing stage-specific: evidence from pupillometry.

Authors:  Melissa J Ptok; Kara E Hannah; Scott Watter
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2020-02-08

5.  Judgments of Learning in Context: Backgrounds Can Both Reduce and Produce Metamemory Illusions.

Authors:  Joshua R Tatz; Zehra F Peynircioğlu
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-05

6.  Congruency Encoding Effects on Recognition Memory: A Stage-Specific Account of Desirable Difficulty.

Authors:  Melissa J Ptok; Sandra J Thomson; Karin R Humphreys; Scott Watter
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2019-04-24

Review 7.  Different impact of task switching and response-category conflict on subsequent memory.

Authors:  Michèle C Muhmenthaler; Beat Meier
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2019-12-05

8.  Recognition of Studied Words in Perceptual Disfluent Sans Forgetica Font.

Authors:  Lucy Cui; Jereth Liu
Journal:  Vision (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-24

9.  Increasing control improves further control, but it does not enhance memory for the targets in a face-word Stroop task.

Authors:  Luis Jiménez; Cástor Méndez; Oscar Agra; Javier Ortiz-Tudela
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2020-08
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.