A theoretical account of the effects of environmental context upon cognitive processes

Abstract

Although the environmental context effect typically refers to superior performance in the context of original learning, this result is not consistently found across all experimental paradigms or instructional sets. Thus far, a precise statement ofthe underlying mechanisms and boundaries of the context effect has been absent from the literature, with the research having focused primarily on the robustness of the effect. The current exposition of a theoretical model and interpretation of the environmental context effect not only provides an explanation of the same-context testing superiority, but also provides the necessary parameters allowing for the prediction of situations in which same-context testing should not be superior. Furthermore, the model has implications for complex learning situations which have not been tested in the research literature. The current model is grounded in the principles of classical conditioning. Thus, it is assumed that environmental context stimuli function in the same way that classically conditioned stimuli do and, as such, have effects on the various phenomena and processes associated with classical conditioning (e.g., acquisition, transfer, extinction and spontaneous recovery, and latent inhibition). Furthermore, the saliency of such stimuli should be subject to boundaries analogous to those affecting other conditioned stimuli.The environmental context effect, representing superior memory for information learned and tested in the same as opposed to different environments, has been accorded theoretical significance throughout the history of modern experimental psychology (e.g., McGeoch, 1942;McGovern, 1964). Numerous recent experiments have provided empirical support for the effect in both human (e.g.,

Environmental Context-Dependent Recognition Memory Effects: An Examination of ICE Model and Cue-Overload Hypotheses

“…Dalton, 1993;J. E. Eich, 1980;Geiselman & Bjork, 1980;Lockhart & Craik, 1990;Nixon & Kanak, 1985). Smith (1986Smith ( , 1988Smith ( , 1994Smith & Vela, 2001) poetically labelled this the outshining hypothesis, drawing an analogy between the way a bright light outshines and effectively hides any changes in a dim light, and the way high-strength stimulus item cues mask any influence of lower strength EC cues.…”

Effects of changes in relative cue strength on context-dependent recognition.

“…The basic idea that failures to observe context-dependent recognition are caused by differences in relative cue strength has been expressed by a number of authors who have not used the outshining metaphor (e.g., Dalton, 1993; J. E. Eich, 1980; Geiselman & Bjork, 1980; Nixon & Kanak, 1985).…”

Associative theory versus classical conditioning: Their proper relationship

“…However the formation of associations between lexical items through prior experience occurs neurally, it bears an isomorphic relation with the classical conditioning process. Theories about context as a modulator of meaning have been stimulating research in both classical conditioning (Miller & Schactman 1985;Nixon & Kanak 1985) and psycholinguistics (e.g., S. M. Smith et al 1978). It has been found repeatedly that the reported meaning or recognition of linguistic units (phonemes, words, or sentences) is dependent upon the physical or linguistic context in which they are embedded (e.g., Smith et al 1978;Tulving et al 1964;Warren & Warren 1970).…”

“…Many classical conditioning studies have found that embedding conditional stimuli in differing stimulus contexts modulates the strength, direction, and "content" of the CR depending upon the subject's prior history in that context (e.g., see a review in Siegel 1983 for rats administered drugs in differing room contexts, and Razran 1971, pp. 136-37, for a study with students who experienced linguistic stimuli in differing room contexts; also see Mackintosh 1983, p. 187, for the role of contextual stimuli in recent conditioned inhibition and contingency theories, and, Nixon & Kanak 1985 for related mathematical formulations).…”