Dual-retrieval processes in free and associative recall.

Recent dual-retrieval accounts of free recall postulate that a memory target can be recalled either by directly accessing its verbatim trace or by reconstructing it from semantic or other relational information. We introduce a simple paradigm, derived from the classic Estes RTT procedure, that separates direct access from reconstruction and that separates reconstruction from a metacognitive judgment process that authorizes reconstructed targets for output. Results are reported from four experiments, two that applied the paradigm to free recall and two that extended it to associative recall. The principal findings were that (a) direct access was enhanced by manipulations that made targets' surface forms easier to process or that focused recall on individual targets, (b) reconstruction was enhanced by manipulations that made targets' meaning content easier to process or that focused recall on groups of targets, and (c) such manipulations produced single dissociations, double dissociations, and reversed associations between direct access, reconstruction, and metacognitive judgment. We discuss how this paradigm might be exploited to unify dual-retrieval conceptions of recall and recognition.

[1]  B. Underwood,et al.  Studies of distributed practice. IX. Learning and retention of paired adjectives as a function of intralist similarity. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  B. Underwood,et al.  Studies of distributed practice. VIII. Learning and retention of paired nonsense syllables as a function of intralist similarity. , 1953, Journal of experimental psychology.

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

[4]  W. Estes,et al.  Learning theory and the new "mental chemistry". , 1960, Psychological review.

[5]  Further Evidence that Strongest Free-Recalled Items are not Recalled First , 1965, Psychological reports.

[6]  William F. Battig,et al.  Priority of free recall of newly learned items , 1965 .

[7]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[8]  W. Montague,et al.  Category norms of verbal items in 56 categories A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms , 1969 .

[9]  James G. Greeno,et al.  A cognitive interpretation of negative transfer and forgetting of paired associates , 1971 .

[10]  A. Paivio Imagery and verbal processes , 1972 .

[11]  Errors as a function of noun concreteness. , 1973 .

[12]  H. Halff The Role of Opportunities for Recall in Learning to Retrieve. , 1977 .

[13]  W. F. Battig,et al.  Handbook of semantic word norms , 1978 .

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

[15]  Mark L. Howe,et al.  An identifiable model of two-stage learning☆ , 1982 .

[16]  C. Brainerd,et al.  The general theory of two-stage learning: A mathematical review with illustrations from memory development. , 1982 .

[17]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. , 1984, Psychological review.

[18]  D. G. Payne,et al.  Recall criterion does not affect recall level or hypermnesia: A puzzle for generate/recognize theories , 1985, Memory & cognition.

[19]  B. Ackerman Children’s Retrieval Deficit , 1985 .

[20]  Mark L. Howe,et al.  On the development of forgetting. , 1985 .

[21]  Charles J. Brainerd,et al.  Basic Processes in Memory Development , 1985, Springer Series in Cognitive Development.

[22]  C. Brainerd,et al.  Storage-retrieval processes of normal and learning-disabled children: a stages-of-learning analysis of picture-word effects. , 1985, Child development.

[23]  David G. Payne,et al.  Hypermnesia for pictures and words: Testing the recall level hypothesis. , 1986 .

[24]  David G. Payne,et al.  Hypermnesia and reminiscence in recall: A historical and empirical review. , 1987 .

[25]  K. Kirsner,et al.  Discovering functionally independent mental processes: the principle of reversed association. , 1988, Psychological review.

[26]  M. Erdelyi,et al.  The effect of response bias on recall performance, with some observations on processing bias. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[27]  M. Erdelyi,et al.  The effect of response bias on recall performance, with some observations on processing bias. , 1989 .

[28]  V. Reyna,et al.  The development of forgetting and reminiscence. , 1990, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.

[29]  V. Reyna,et al.  Children's cognitive triage: optimal retrieval or effortful processing? , 1990, Journal of experimental child psychology.

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

[31]  V. Reyna Reasoning, Remembering, and Their Relationship: Social, Cognitive, and Developmental Issues , 1992 .

[32]  V. Reyna,et al.  Development of Long-Term Retention , 2011, Springer New York.

[33]  Mark L. Howe,et al.  Is retrievability grouping good for recall , 1993 .

[34]  Retrieval-based and familiarity-based recognition and the quality of information in episodic memory , 1993 .

[35]  Andrew P. Yonelinas,et al.  Separating conscious and unconscious influences of memory: measuring recollection , 1993 .

[36]  Roderick Hunt,et al.  The Enigma of Organization and Distinctiveness , 1993 .

[37]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness effects on memory: when and why? , 1994 .

[38]  V. Reyna,et al.  Development of Gist versus Verbatim Memory in Sentence Recognition: Effects of Lexical Familiarity, Semantic Content, Encoding Instructions, and Retention Interval. , 1994 .

[39]  G. Murphy,et al.  Forgetting of verbatim information in discourse , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[40]  V. Reyna,et al.  Development of Gist Versus Verbatim Memory in Sentence Recognition: Effects of Lexical Familiarity, Semantic Content, Encoding Instructions, and Retention Interval , 1994 .

[41]  V. Reyna,et al.  Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis , 1995 .

[42]  E. Erdfelder,et al.  Toward unbiased measurement of conscious and unconscious memory processes within the process dissociation framework. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

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

[44]  D L Hintzman,et al.  Violations of the independence assumption in process dissociation. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[45]  S. Gronlund,et al.  Global matching models of recognition memory: How the models match the data , 1996, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[46]  Jason M. Blackwell,et al.  Memory Illusions: Recalling, Recognizing, and Recollecting Events that Never Occurred , 1996 .

[47]  K. McDermott The Persistence of False Memories in List Recall , 1996 .

[48]  Marcia K. Johnson,et al.  Evaluating characteristics of false memories: Remember/know judgments and memory characteristics questionnaire compared , 1997, Memory & cognition.

[49]  David G. Payne,et al.  Memory illusions and consciousness: Examining the phenomenology of true and false memories , 1997 .

[50]  H. Roediger,et al.  Associative Processes in False Recall and False Recognition , 1997 .

[51]  L L Jacoby,et al.  Invariance in automatic influences of memory: toward a user's guide for the process-dissociation procedure. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[52]  G. Hitch,et al.  Separate effects of word frequency and age of acquisition in recognition and recall. , 1998 .

[53]  W P Wallace,et al.  Are false recognitions influenced by prerecognition processing? , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[54]  John G. Seamon,et al.  Creating False Memories of Words With or Without Recognition of List Items: Evidence for Nonconscious Processes , 1998 .

[55]  C J Brainerd,et al.  On the development of conscious and unconscious memory. , 1998, Developmental psychology.

[56]  Evan Heit,et al.  Two-Process Models of Recognition Memory: Evidence for Recall-to-Reject? , 1999 .

[57]  Mitchell S. Sommers,et al.  Who Really Lives Next Door: Creating False Memories with Phonological Neighbors☆☆☆★ , 1999 .

[58]  Martine B. Powell,et al.  The effects of repeated experience on children's suggestibility. , 1999, Developmental psychology.

[59]  V. Reyna,et al.  Conjoint recognition. , 1999, Psychological review.

[60]  David M. Riefer,et al.  Theoretical and empirical review of multinomial process tree modeling , 1999, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[61]  J. Neuschatz,et al.  Recall accuracy and illusory memories: when more is less. , 1999, Memory.

[62]  Caren M. Rotello,et al.  Recall processes in recognition memory , 2000 .

[63]  I Rosén,et al.  Semantic processing without conscious identification: evidence from event-related potentials. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[64]  M. Masson,et al.  Evidence for a generate-recognize model of episodic influences on word-stem completion. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[65]  S Dennis,et al.  Dual processes in recognition: Does a focus on measurement operations provide a sufficient foundation? , 2000, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[66]  S. Ceci,et al.  Fuzzy-Trace Theory and Cognitive Triage in Memory Development , 2001 .

[67]  V. Reyna,et al.  Fuzzy-trace theory: dual processes in memory, reasoning, and cognitive neuroscience. , 2001, Advances in child development and behavior.

[68]  Ron Wright,et al.  Conjoint recognition and phantom recollection. , 2001 .

[69]  David M. Riefer,et al.  Multinomial Modeling and the Measurement of Cognitive Processes , 2001 .

[70]  Patrick E. Shrout,et al.  Toward a psychometric analysis of violations of the independence assumption in process dissociation , 1997 .