In four experiments, we investigated background-color context effects in free recall. A total of 194 undergraduates studied words presented one by one against a background color, and oral free recall was tested after a 30-sec filled retention interval. A signal for recall was presented against a background color throughout the test. Recalled items were classified as same- and different-context items according to whether the background colors at study and test were the same or different. Significant context effects were found in Experiments I and 2, in which two background colors were randomly alternated word by word. No context effects were found in Experiments 3 and 4, in which a common background color was presented for all items (Experiment 3) or for a number of successive items (Experiment 4). The results indicate that a change in background colors is necessary and sufficient to produce context effects. Implications of the present findings are discussed.

In four experiments, a total of 384 undergraduates incidentally learned a list of 24 nouns twice in the same context (same-context repetition) or different contexts (different-context repetition). Free recall was measured in a neutral context. Experiments 1, 2, and 3 used a context repetition (same- or different-context repetition) × inter-study and retention intervals (10 min or 1 day) between-participants design. Context was manipulated by the combination of place, social environment, and encoding task (Experiment 1), place and social environment (Experiment 2), or place alone (Experiment 3). Experiment 4 used a context repetition × type of context (context manipulated by place or by place, social environment, and encoding task) between-participants design, with a 10-min inter-study interval and a one-day retention interval. The present results indicate that the determinant of the superiority of same- or different-context repetition in recall is the type of context. Implications of the results were discussed.

No abstract

In two experiments, we examined whether the size of place-context-dependent recognition decreased with study time and with the meaningfulness of the to-beremembered materials. A group of 80 undergraduates intentionally studied a list of words in a short (1.5 s per item) or a long (4.0 s per item) study-time condition (Exp. 1). Another 40 undergraduates studied lists consisting of words and nonwords in the long-study-time condition (Exp. 2). After a short retention interval, recognition for the targets was tested in the same or in a different context. Context was manipulated by means of the combination of place, subsidiary task, and experimenter. Significant context-dependent recognition discrimination was found for words in the shortstudy-time condition (Exp. 1), but not in the long-study-time condition (Exps. 1 and 2). Significant effects were found as well for nonwords, even in the long-study-time condition (Exp. 2). These results are explained well by an outshining account: that is, by principles of outshining and encoding specificity.

Three experiments, with a total of 120 undergraduates, were carried out to examine whether recognition for words is better when tested against a background-color that matches that at study compared to testing in a context in which no items were studied. The experiments also examined whether presentation rateῌa determinant of item strengthῌinteracts with the background-color context. Undergraduate participants studied 40 target words presented at either a rate of 1.5 or 3.0 seconds per word in one of two background-color contexts in Experiment 1, and studied 36 words in one of six contexts in Experiments 2 and 3. Recognition for the targets was tested with lists consisting of equal numbers of distractors and targets, immediately after study in Experiments 1 and 2, and after a 5-minute filled retention interval in Experiment 3. Although no e#ect on recognition of the background-color context was observed in Experiment 1, context e#ects were found in Experiments 2 and 3. Presentation rate did not interact with the context e#ect. The implications of the present findings are discussed.Key words : recognition, environmental context, background color, cue-overload, presentation rate ῎Q̳̯ῌ 3 ῞̯QQ̰Q̮῟ῌ QQ̯QῖQQQῌῐῼ̯QQ̰ῬῳῗῨQQ̮ῌ QQ̯QQ̮ Ῡ̯̮῝Ίῌῐῼ̯ῬῳῗῨQQῥῧΰῌ ̮QQQQQQ̰Qῗ̮Q̮̰QῢΊ῍ ῎Q̳̯QQQ̯ῌ QQ 120 ῑ̯Q Q̯ΐ῝Ί῍ ̮ῦ̯῎Q̳̯ῌ Qῒ̳Q̯ QῸ̯ῡ̯῞̯ΐῨQQQQ̯Q̲̯QQ QῌῐQ̲̯ ̯QQQ̮QῖῨ̮Q̮ΰQῢΊ῍ QQQ̯ῌ 40 Q̯QQ ῐQQ 1ῑῌ ΐῨ̯ 36 Q ̯QQ ῐQQ 2 ̯ 3ῑ ̰ Q̮Ί῍ QQ̯ 1.5Q/QΐῨ̯ 3.0Q/Q̯QQQQ̯QQ̮Ί῍ ̮ῦ̯ῌ QQ̯ 2 Q̮̯QQQῌῐ ῐQQ 1ῑῌ ΐῨ̯ 6 Q̮̯QQQῌῐ ῐQQ 2 ̯ 3ῑ ̯ῘῩ̮̯ΰ̯̯ QQ̮Ί῍ QQῬῳ̯̯ῌ Q̮ΊQQ ῐ`῏Ὺῳῑ ̯QQ̯ῲ̰Ῥῳ̱̰`῏̰QῚQ̰ῙΊ῍ QQ 1 ̯ 2 ̯ Q῭Ύ̱ῴ̯QQ̯Ῥῳ̮ῌ QQ 3 ̯ 5 Q ̯QΌ Q̯Ῥῳ̮Ί῍ QQ 1 ̯̯ῌ Q Q̯QQQῌῐQ̲̰QῙ̯̮῝Ί̮ῌ QQ 2 ̯ 3 ̯̯ΐῶ̯ῌῐQ̲̰Q̮Ί῍ ῌῐQ̲̯Q QQQQ̲̯QQQ̯ΐῶ̯̯̮῝Ί῍ QQ̯ῌ ῎Q̳Q̲̯ῶ̳̯῞῟QQ̮Ί῍ ̰῏̱῏̱ ῎ QQῌ ̳Qῌῐῌ QQQῌ Q̮̮ῧ̲Q̲ῌ QQQQ ̰̱΅῏̱ ΏQQ̯ῌ `῏Ὺῳ̯ῌῐ̯̯QQ̮ Ῡ῟Ῠ῍ `῏Ὺῳ̯QQ´ῤQQ̯QQ̯̯ῨQ῍ ̯ΐῧῌ ῌῐ̯`῏Ὺῳ῾̯̰̱΅῏̱QQ̯QQ ̮Q̯ΐῨ῍ ῌῐ̯Q̯ῌ Q̮Q̯Q̳̮῟Ῠ ̳̯