Size and reflection effects in priming: A test of transfer-appropriate processing

Prior research has suggested that priming on perceptual implicit tests is insensitive to changes in stimulus size and reflection. The present experiments were performed to investigate whether size and reflection effects can be obtained in priming under conditions that encourage the processing of this information at study and at test, as predicted by transfer-appropriate processing. The results indicate that priming was affected by a change in the physical size of an object when study and test tasks required a judgment about the real size of pictorial objects (e.g., deciding whether a zebra presented small or large on the screen was larger or smaller than a typical chair), and when the test task required the identification of fragmented pictures. However, a change in left-right orientation had no effect on priming when study and test tasks required a judgment about the left-right orientation of familiar objects, or when the test task involved the identification of fragmented pictures. This difference between size and reflection effects is discussed in terms of the differential importance of size and reflection information in shape identification.

[1]  P. A. Kolers,et al.  Procedures of mind. , 1984 .

[2]  P. Jolicoeur.  A size-congruency effect in memory for visual shape , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[3]  Paul A Kolers,et al.  Spatial and ordinal components of form perception and literacy , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[4]  L. Jacoby.  Remembering the data: analyzing interactive processes in reading , 1983 .

[5]  J. Davidoff,et al.  The Role of Colour in Categorial Judgements , 1988, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[6]  A. Paivio.  Perceptual comparisons through the mind’s eye , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[7]  H L Roediger,et al.  Implicit memory. Retention without remembering. , 1990, The American psychologist.

[8]  E Tulving,et al.  Priming and human memory systems. , 1990, Science.

[9]  L. Squire.  Memory and the hippocampus: a synthesis from findings with rats, monkeys, and humans. , 1992, Psychological review.

[10]  Y. Miyashita.  Inferior temporal cortex: where visual perception meets memory. , 1993, Annual review of neuroscience.

[11]  Daniel L. Schacter,et al.  Priming and recognition of transformed three-dimensional objects: effects of size and reflection. , 1992 .

[12]  Lee Ryan,et al.  Transfer-appropriate processing for implicit and explicit memory. , 1990 .

[13]  H. Roediger,et al.  Explaining dissociations between implicit and explicit measures of retention: A processing account , 1989 .

[14]  L. Cooper,et al.  Implicit memory for unfamiliar objects depends on access to structural descriptions. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[15]  John D. Bransford,et al.  Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing , 1977 .

[16]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  A standardized set of 260 pictures: norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. , 1980, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[17]  H. Roediger,et al.  Classifying implicit memory tests: Category association and anagram solution , 1990 .

[18]  L. Squire.  "Memory and the hippocampus: A synthesis from findings with rats, monkeys, and humans": Correction. , 1992 .

[19]  I. Biederman,et al.  Priming contour-deleted images: Evidence for intermediate representations in visual object recognition , 1991, Cognitive Psychology.

[20]  S. Hamann.  Level-of-processing effects in conceptually driven implicit tasks , 1990 .

[21]  David C. Plaut,et al.  Visual Object Representation: Interpreting Neurophysiological Data within a Computational Framework , 1990, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[22]  P Jolicoeur,et al.  Size effects in visual recognition memory are determined by perceived size , 1992, Memory & cognition.

[23]  Kavitha Srinivas.  Perceptual specificity in nonverbal priming. , 1993 .

[24]  S. Hashtroudi,et al.  Does organization improve priming? , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[25]  J. G. Snodgrass,et al.  Priming effects in picture fragment completion: support for the perceptual closure hypothesis. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[26]  Kavitha Srinivas,et al.  Specificity of Operations in Perceptual Priming , 1993 .

[27]  S Rajaram,et al.  Perceptual effects on remembering: recollective processes in picture recognition memory. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[28]  Twila Tardif,et al.  Reading a week later: Perceptual and conceptual factors , 1989 .

[29]  I. Biederman,et al.  Size invariance in visual object priming , 1992 .

[30]  T. Blaxton.  Investigating dissociations among memory measures: Support for a transfer-appropriate processing framework. , 1989 .

[31]  J G Snodgrass,et al.  Dissociations among implicit and explicit memory tasks: the role of stimulus similarity. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[32]  H. Roediger,et al.  Altering retrieval demands reverses the picture superiority effect , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[33]  D. Schacter.  Understanding implicit memory. A cognitive neuroscience approach. , 1992, The American psychologist.

[34]  I. Biederman,et al.  Evidence for Complete Translational and Reflectional Invariance in Visual Object Priming , 1991, Perception.