Recognition Failure: Another Case of Retrieval Failure.

A theoretical explanation of the phenomenon of recognition failure (failure to recognize items that can be recalled) is presented in terms of the dual access theory of recognition, which distinguishes between presentation codes and conceptual (retrieval) codes. In the paired-associate paradigm, retrieval involves access to the pair as a unit, which is holistically coded. As predicted by the theory, recognition failure is reduced when a more stringent recognition criterion is used, specific item pairs are more subject to recognition failure than others, and recognition failure is essentially eliminated when the proper access test (backward retrieval) is used and significantly reduced when variability in recognition performance is taken into account. These results were extended to an experimental paradigm that investigated performance at steady state.

[1]  James G. Greeno,et al.  8 – How Associations Are Memorized1 , 1970 .

[2]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  Models Of Human Memory , 1970 .

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

[4]  B C Tatum,et al.  Role of response imagery on stimulus recognition* , 1973, Memory & cognition.

[5]  Richard C. Atkinson,et al.  Search and decision processes in recognition memory. , 1974 .

[6]  E. Tulving,et al.  Retrieval processes in recognition memory: Effects of associative context , 1971 .

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

[8]  David A. Wicklund,et al.  Free Association Norms. , 1972 .

[9]  G. Mandler,et al.  Retrieval processes in recognition , 1974, Memory & cognition.

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

[11]  J. Grier,et al.  Nonparametric indexes for sensitivity and bias: computing formulas. , 1971, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  John L. Santa,et al.  Where does the confusion lief: Comments on the Wiseman and Tulving paper , 1976 .

[13]  P. Salzberg.  On the Generality of Encoding Specificity. , 1976 .

[14]  J. L. Santa,et al.  Encoding specificity: Fact or artifact , 1974 .

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

[16]  M. Posner,et al.  Attention and cognitive control. , 1975 .

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

[18]  R. M. Schwartz.  Organization and recognition accuracy: The effect of context on blocked presentation , 1975 .

[19]  George Mandler,et al.  Effects of organization and semantic similarity on recall and recognition , 1969 .

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

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

[22]  Endel Tulving,et al.  When is recall higher than recognition? , 1968 .

[23]  H. Kucera,et al.  Computational analysis of present-day American English , 1967 .

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

[25]  George Mandler,et al.  Determinants of recognition and recall: Accessibility and generation , 1977 .

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