Episodic memory is accounted for with two processes: ‘familiarity’ when generally recognizing an item and ‘recollection’ when retrieving the full contextual details bound with the item. Paradoxically, people sometimes report contextual information as familiar but without recollecting details, which is not easily accounted for by existing theories. We tested a combination of item recognition confidence and source memory, focusing upon ‘item-only hits with source unknown’ (‘item familiarity’), ‘low-confidence hits with correct source memory’ (‘context familiarity’), and ‘high-confidence hits with correct source memory’ (‘recollection’). Results across multiple within-subjects (trial-wise) and between subjects (individual variability) levels indicated these were behaviorally and physiologically distinct. Behaviorally, a crossover interaction was evident in response times, with context familiarity being slower than each condition during item recognition, but faster during source memory. Electrophysiologically, a Condition x Time x Location triple dissociation was evident in event-related potentials (ERPs), which was then independently replicated. Context familiarity exhibited an independent negative central effect from 800-1200 ms, differentiated from positive ERPs for item-familiarity (400 to 600 ms) and recollection (600 to 900 ms). These three conditions thus reflect mutually exclusive, fundamentally different processes of episodic memory. Context familiarity is a third distinct process of episodic memory.Significance statement/SummaryMemory for past events is widely believed to operate through two different processes: one called ‘recollection’ when retrieving confident, specific details of a memory, and another called ‘familiarity’ when only having an unsure but conscious awareness that an item was experienced before. When people successfully retrieve details such as the source or context of a prior event, it has been assumed to reflect recollection. We demonstrate that familiarity of context is functionally distinct from familiarity of items and recollection and offer a new trivariate model. The three memory response types were differentiated across multiple behavioral and physiological measures, and at the trial level and among individual variability between-subjects, too. That is, what has traditionally been thought to be two kinds of memory processes are actually three, which become evident when using sensitive enough multi-measures. Akin to missing obvious elements when using only a two-dimensional lens to see a three-dimensional picture, when we have the ability to look for the three processes of memory, we can see them clearly dissociate and as independently replicable across several different studies of diverse cohorts from different laboratories. Together, these data reveal that context familiarity is a third process of human episodic memory.
