Literature DB >> 9337579

Encoding, repetition, and the mirror effect in recognition memory: symmetry in motion.

A Hilford1, M Glanzer, K Kim.   

Abstract

Attention/likelihood theory has been used to explain the mirror effect in recognition memory. The theory also predicts that any manipulation that affects the recognition of old items will also affect recognition of the new items-more specifically, that all the underlying distributions will move and that they will move symmetrically on the decision axis. In five experiments, we tested this prediction. The first two experiments used encoding tasks during study to change recognition performance for high- and low-frequency words. The results show symmetrical dispersion of the underlying distributions. The final three experiments used repetition to increase recognition performance. Repetition produced a symmetrical pattern of movement that was different from that produced by encoding task. This pattern is, however, also covered by attention/likelihood theory. A further extension of the theory was used to predict response times.

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9337579     DOI: 10.3758/bf03211302

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


  11 in total

1.  Recognition memory for nouns as a function of abstractness and frequency.

Authors:  A M GORMAN
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1961-01

2.  Forgetting and the mirror effect in recognition memory: concentering of underlying distributions.

Authors:  M Glanzer; J K Adams; G Iverson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 3.051

3.  Repetition and practice effects in a lexical decision task.

Authors:  G B Forbach; R F Stanners; L Hochhaus
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1974-03

4.  The mirror effect in recognition memory: data and theory.

Authors:  M Glanzer; J K Adams
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 3.051

5.  Intralist interference in recognition memory.

Authors:  K Kim; M Glanzer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 3.051

6.  Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.

Authors:  A Paivio; J C Yuille; S A Madigan
Journal:  J Exp Psychol       Date:  1968-01

7.  Speed versus accuracy instructions, study time, and the mirror effect.

Authors:  K Kim; M Glanzer
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 3.051

Review 8.  The regularities of recognition memory.

Authors:  M Glanzer; J K Adams; G J Iverson; K Kim
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  The mirror effect in recognition memory.

Authors:  M Glanzer; J K Adams
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1985-01

10.  A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.

Authors:  G Gillund; R M Shiffrin
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1984-01       Impact factor: 8.934

View more
  5 in total

1.  A reexamination of stimulus-frequency effects in recognition: two mirrors for low- and high-frequency pseudowords.

Authors:  Lynn M Reder; Paige Angstadt; Melanie Cary; Michael A Erickson; Michael S Ayers
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.051

2.  Orthographic neighborhood size effects in recognition memory.

Authors:  Gina A Glanc; Robert L Greene
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2007-03

3.  Super Memory Bros.: going from mirror patterns to concordant patterns via similarity enhancements.

Authors:  Jason D Ozubko; Steve Joordens
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-12

Review 4.  Three regularities of recognition memory: the role of bias.

Authors:  Andrew Hilford; Laurence T Maloney; Murray Glanzer; Kisok Kim
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2015-12

5.  Word frequency and word likeness mirror effects in episodic recognition memory.

Authors:  Andrew Heathcote; Elizabeth Ditton; Kristie Mitchell
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2006-06
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.