A direct comparison of recognition failure rates for recallable names in episodic and semanticmemory tests

In an extension of Muter’s (1978) research, subjects studied pairs of lowercase cues and uppercase targets consisting of famous names (e.g., betsy ROSS), nonfamous names (e.g., edwin CONWAY), weakly related words (e.g., grasp BABY), and unrelated words (e.g., art GO). Following recognition tests in which surname and word targets were tested in the absence of their cues, cued recall tests for the surname and word targets were given. In semantic recognition and recall tests, the response to a surname was to be made solely on the basis of its fame, regardless of whether or not it had appeared in the study list. In episodic memory tests, the response to a surname was to be made solely on the basis of whether or not it had appeared in the study list, regardless of its fame. In all tests, the response to a nonname was to be made solely on the basis of whether or not it had appeared in the study list. The Tulving-Wiseman (1975) function accurately predicted recognition failure rates for famous surnames, whether or not they were from the study list and whether the test was episodic or semantic, and for targets from the weakly relatedword pairs. However, recognition failure rates were lower than the Tulving-Wiseman function predicted for nonfamous surnames in the episodic memory test and for targets from unrelated word pairs. Discussion focused on these results’ implications for the nature of the Tulving-Wiseman function and the psychological reality of the episodic-semantic memory distinction.

[1]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Sentence Verification, Sentence Recognition, and the Semantic-Episodic Distinction. , 1978 .

[2]  E. Tulving.  Ecphoric processes in recall and recognition. , 1976 .

[3]  Douglas J. Herrmann,et al.  More evidence for the existence of separate semantic and episodic stores in long-term memory. , 1980 .

[4]  E. Tulving,et al.  Episodic and semantic memory , 1972 .

[5]  Daniel L. Schacter,et al.  Priming effects in word-fragment completion are independent of recognition memory. , 1982 .

[6]  Endel Tulving,et al.  Episodic memory: When recognition fails. , 1975 .

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

[8]  John Brown,et al.  Recall and Recognition , 1976 .

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

[10]  C. Thompson,et al.  Encoding specificity: retrieval asymmetry in the recognition failure paradigm. , 1977, Journal of experimental psychology. Human learning and memory.

[11]  Kim Kirsner,et al.  Context and Repetition Effects in Lexical Decision and Recognition Memory. , 1982 .

[12]  D. G. Payne,et al.  Recognition failure of recallable famous names in a hybrid semantic-episodic memory task , 1983 .

[13]  Endel Tulving,et al.  Relation between recognition and recognition failure of recallable words , 1975 .

[14]  M. McCloskey,et al.  Are semantic memory and episodic memory distinct systems , 1981 .

[15]  W. Kintsch,et al.  The representation of meaning in memory , 1974 .

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

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

[18]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Priming in episodic and semantic memory. , 1979 .

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

[20]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory Evidence against a Semantic-episodic Distinction £-john R. Necessarily a Functional One, It Has Often , 2022 .

[21]  E. Tulving,et al.  Organization of memory. , 1973 .

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