The source of feelings of familiarity: the discrepancy-attribution hypothesis.

Many investigators have observed that the feeling of familiarity is associated with fluency of processing. The authors demonstrated a case in which the feeling of familiarity did not result from fluency per se; they argued that it resulted instead from perceiving a discrepancy between the actual and expected fluency of processing (B. W. A. Whittlesea & L. D. Williams, 1998). In this article, the authors extend that argument. They observed that stimuli that are experienced as strongly familiar when presented in isolation are instead experienced as being novel when presented in a rhyme or semantic context. They interpreted that result to mean that in those other contexts, the subjects brought a different standard to bear in evaluating the fluency of their processing. This different standard caused the subjects to perceive their performance not as discrepant, but as coherent in one case and incongruous in the other. The authors suggest that the perception of discrepancy is a major factor in producing the feeling of familiarity. They further suggest that the occurrence of that perception depends on the task in which the person is engaged when encountering the stimulus, because that task affects the standard that the person will apply in evaluating their processing.

[1]  R L Greene,et al.  Mirror effect in frequency discrimination. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[2]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  An illusion of memory: false recognition influenced by unconscious perception , 1989 .

[3]  E. Tulving Memory and consciousness. , 1985 .

[4]  M. C. Escher,et al.  The World of M.C. Escher , 1971 .

[5]  M Glanzer,et al.  The mirror effect in recognition memory , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[6]  D. Stephen Lindsay,et al.  The Process-Dissociation Procedure and Similarity: Defining and Estimating Recollection and Familiarity in Recognition Memory , 1997 .

[7]  J T Wixted,et al.  Decision rules for recognition memory confidence judgments. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[8]  E. Balint Memory and consciousness. , 1987, The International journal of psycho-analysis.

[9]  I. Hyman,et al.  The Role of Mental Imagery in the Creation of False Childhood Memories , 1996 .

[10]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: applications to dementia and amnesia. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  L D Williams,et al.  Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don't? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity. , 1998, Acta psychologica.

[12]  Recovered memories: Unearthing the past in court , 1995 .

[13]  G. Mandler Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence. , 1980 .

[14]  L. Reder,et al.  What determines initial feeling of knowing? Familiarity with question terms, not with the answer , 1992 .

[15]  A. Glenberg,et al.  The illusion of knowing: Failure in the self-assessment of comprehension , 1982 .

[16]  J. Deese On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall. , 1959, Journal of experimental psychology.

[17]  A. Marcel Conscious and unconscious perception: An approach to the relations between phenomenal experience and perceptual processes , 1983, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  Kevin J. Hawley,et al.  Contribution of perceptual fluency to recognition judgments. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  D. Stephen Lindsay,et al.  Creating Illusions of Familiarity in a Cued Recall Remember/Know Paradigm , 1996 .

[20]  E. Hirshman,et al.  True and False Recognition in MINERVA2: Explanations from a Global Matching Perspective , 1998 .

[21]  B. W. Whittlesea,et al.  Incidentally, things in general are particularly determined: An episodic-processing account of implicit learning , 1993 .

[22]  C. Luo Enhanced feeling of recognition: effects of identifying and manipulating test items on recognition memory , 1993 .

[23]  Suparna Rajaram,et al.  Remembering and knowing: Two means of access to the personal past , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[24]  D. L. Hintzman On explaining the mirror effect. , 1994 .

[25]  Stephen B. Barton,et al.  A case study of anomaly detection: Shallow semantic processing and cohesion establishment , 1993, Memory & cognition.

[26]  K. McDermott,et al.  Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. , 1995 .

[27]  L. Jacoby,et al.  On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning. , 1981, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[28]  I. Begg,et al.  Repetition and the ring of truth: Biasing comments. , 1991 .

[29]  Bruce W.A. Whittlesea,et al.  Production, Evaluation, and Preservation of Experiences: Constructive Processing in Remembering and Performance Tasks , 1997 .

[30]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Dissociating Automatic and Consciously Controlled Effects of Study/Test Compatibility , 1996 .

[31]  B. W. Whittlesea,et al.  The heuristic basis of remembering and classification: fluency, generation, and resemblance. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  M Glanzer,et al.  The mirror effect in recognition memory: data and theory. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[33]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  Illusions of immediate memory: evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality , 1990 .

[34]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Source monitoring. , 1993, Psychological bulletin.

[35]  G. Hitch,et al.  Illusions of familiarity caused by cohort activation , 1997 .

[36]  A. Koriat How do we know that we know? The accessibility model of the feeling of knowing. , 1993 .

[37]  L. Jacoby A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory , 1991 .

[38]  Veronica J. Dark,et al.  Perceptual Fluency and Recognition Judgments , 1985 .

[39]  Endel Tulving,et al.  Organization of memory: Quo vadis? , 1995 .

[40]  Decision rules for recognition memory confidence judgments. , 1998 .

[41]  Henry L. Roediger,et al.  Attempting to Avoid Illusory Memories: Robust False Recognition of Associates Persists under Conditions of Explicit Warnings and Immediate Testing ☆ ☆☆ , 1998 .

[42]  R. Zajonc Feeling and thinking : Preferences need no inferences , 1980 .

[43]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives , 1986 .

[44]  Larry L. Jacoby,et al.  The construction of subjective experience: Memory attributions , 1990 .

[45]  G D Logan,et al.  What is the mechanism for fluency in successive recognition? , 1998, Acta psychologica.

[46]  S. Guttenplan Mind and language , 1975 .

[47]  L. Cermak,et al.  Perceptual fluency as a cue for recognition judgments in amnesia. , 1999, Neuropsychology.

[48]  B. W. Whittlesea,et al.  The inferential basis of familiarity and recall: Evidence for a common underlying process , 2002 .

[49]  R. Bornstein,et al.  The Attribution and Discounting of Perceptual Fluency: Preliminary Tests of a Perceptual Fluency/Attributional Model of the Mere Exposure Effect , 1994 .

[50]  J. Read,et al.  Psychotherapy and memories of childhood sexual abuse: A cognitive perspective , 1994 .

[51]  J. Gardiner,et al.  Recollective experience in word and nonword recognition , 1990, Memory & cognition.

[52]  G. Mandler YOUR FACE LOOKS FAMILIAR BUT I CANT REMEMBER YOUR NAME - A REVIEW OF DUAL PROCESS THEORY , 1991 .