Recognition failure and the composite memory trace in CHARM.

The relation between recognition and recall, and especially the orderly recognition-failure function relating recognition and the recognizability of recallable words, was investigated using a composite holographic associative recall-recognition memory model (CHARM). Ten series of computer simulations are presented. Analysis of CHARM and comparisons to other models indicate that the recognition-failure function depends on (a) both recognition and recall being similar (convolution-correlation) processes such that an interpretable representation is retrieved in both tasks and (b) the information underlying both recall and recognition being stored in the same composite memory trace. It is of considerable interest that constructs central to the distributed nature of CHARM are responsible for the model's adherence to the recognition-failure function.

[1]  E. Tulving,et al.  Recognition failure of categorized words , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[2]  E. Martin,et al.  Stimulus meaningfulness and paired-associate transfer: an encoding variability hypothesis. , 1968, Psychological review.

[3]  D J Bryant,et al.  Exceptions to recognition failure as a function of the encoded association between cue and target , 1991, Memory & cognition.

[4]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  Recognition Failure: Another Case of Retrieval Failure. , 1977 .

[5]  G. Bower.  Imagery as a relational organizer in associative learning , 1970 .

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

[7]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Parallel Models of Associative Memory , 1989 .

[8]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Composite models never (well, hardly ever) compromise: reply to Schooler and Tanaka (1991) , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[9]  B. Murdock.  A Theory for the Storage and Retrieval of Item and Associative Information. , 1982 .

[10]  T. O. Nelson,et al.  Some Constraints on the Generality and Interpretation of the Recognition Failure of Recallable Words , 1979 .

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

[12]  Cognition Edited B Modelling.  Modelling Cognition , 1987 .

[13]  J. Metcalfe.  Composite holographic associative recall model (CHARM) and blended memories in eyewitness testimony. , 1990 .

[14]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  More on Recognition Failure of Recallable Words: Implications for Generation Recognition Models. , 1978 .

[15]  Endel Tulving,et al.  Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. , 1973 .

[16]  H. P. Bahrick.  Two-phase model for prompted recall. , 1970 .

[17]  E. Tulving.  Elements of episodic memory , 1983 .

[18]  A. J. Flexser,et al.  Retrieval independence in recognition and recall. , 1978 .

[19]  I. Begg.  Trace loss and the recognition failure of unrecalled words , 1979 .

[20]  J. Gardiner.  Recognition failures and free-recall failures: Implications for the relation between recall and recognition , 1988, Memory & Cognition.

[21]  L. Postman.  Tests of the generality of the principle of encoding specificity , 1975, Memory & cognition.

[22]  Gregory V. Jones,et al.  Recognition failure when recognition targets and recall cues are identical , 1990 .

[23]  D. Gabor.  A New Microscopic Principle , 1948, Nature.

[24]  Lars-Göran Nilsson,et al.  A reconstructive-processing interpretation of the recognition failure phenomenon ☆ , 1981 .

[25]  Ruth E. Donnelly.  Priming effects in successive episodic tests. , 1988 .

[26]  Gregory V. Jones.  Recognition Failure and Dual Mechanisms in Recall. , 1978 .

[27]  L. Nilsson,et al.  A Functional View of Memory , 1980 .

[28]  Endel Tulving,et al.  A Test of Confusion Theory of Encoding Specificity. , 1975 .

[29]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[30]  Janet Metcalfe,et al.  An encoding and retrieval model of single-trial free recall , 1981 .

[31]  A. J. Flexser.  Homogenizing the 2 × 2 contingency table: A method for removing dependencies due to subject and item differences. , 1981 .

[32]  Geoffrey E. Hinton,et al.  Distributed Representations , 1986, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[33]  E. Tulving,et al.  Encoding specificity: Relation between recall superiority and recognition failure. , 1976 .

[34]  B. Fischhoff,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory , 1980 .

[35]  Michael S. Humphreys,et al.  Effect of a recognition test on a subsequent cued-recall test. , 1979 .

[36]  J. C. Rabinowitz.  Aging and recognition failure. , 1984, Journal of gerontology.

[37]  Stephen A. Ritz,et al.  Distinctive features, categorical perception, and probability learning: some applications of a neural model , 1977 .

[38]  P. Muter.  Recognition failure of recallable words in semantic memory , 1978 .

[39]  Lars-Göran Nilsson,et al.  Recognition Failure of Recallable Unique Names: Evidence For an Empirical Law of Memory and Learning , 1988 .

[40]  Robert A. Bjork,et al.  A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation , 1992 .

[41]  E Tulving,et al.  Recognition failure of words with a single meaning , 1977, Memory & cognition.

[42]  F. Restle,et al.  Significance of all-or-none learning. , 1965, Psychological bulletin.

[43]  G. V. Jones,et al.  Structure of the recall process , 1983 .

[44]  F. W. Wicker,et al.  On the locus of picture-word differences in paired-associate learning , 1970 .

[45]  D. Meyer,et al.  Attention and Performance XIV , 1973 .

[46]  B. Murdock.  Convolution and matrix systems: A reply to Pike. , 1985 .

[47]  Kevin M. McConkey,et al.  Cognition in individual and social contexts , 1989 .

[48]  J. Eich.  Levels of processing, encoding specificity, elaboration, and CHARM. , 1985, Psychology Review.

[49]  D. G. Payne,et al.  A direct comparison of recognition failure rates for recallable names in episodic and semanticmemory tests , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[50]  Endel Tulving,et al.  Exceptions to recognition failure of recallable words , 1980 .

[51]  Murdock,et al.  Learning in a distributed memory model. , 1989 .

[52]  W P Wallace,et al.  Recognition failure of recallable words and recognizable words. , 1978, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[53]  Douglas L. Hintzman,et al.  Recognition and recall in MINERVA 2: Analysis of the 'recognition-failure' paradigm. , 1987 .

[54]  W. Estes.  Statistical theory of spontaneous recovery and regression. , 1955, Psychological review.

[55]  P. Muter.  Recognition and recall of words with a single meaning , 1984 .

[56]  B. Murdock.  Human memory: Theory and data. , 1975 .

[57]  Lynne M. Reder,et al.  A semantic interpretation of encoding specificity , 1974 .

[58]  B. Murdock,et al.  Memory for Serial Order , 1989 .

[59]  R. Lockhart,et al.  Encoding differences in recognition and recall , 1973, Memory & cognition.

[60]  J. Eich.  A composite holographic associative recall model. , 1982 .

[61]  Edwin Martin,et al.  Generation-recognition theory and the encoding specificity principle. , 1975 .

[62]  E. Clarke,et al.  The Tulving-Wiseman law and the recognition of recallable music , 1990, Memory & cognition.