Availability and the direction of associations.

Horowitz, Leonard M.; Brown, Zita M.; Weissbluth, Stephen

doi:10.1037/h0043309

Cited by 30 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following the preliminary results of Asch and Ebenholtz (1962), Horowitz and colleagues found that equality of forward and backward recall was observed only when response availability was equated for both A and B items (Horowitz, Brown, & Weissbluth, 1964;Horowitz, Norman, & Day, 1966). For example, repeatedly generating the response term, as is done in the anticipation procedure, will enhance the availabilityof the B items over that of the A items, thus producing asymmetric recall.…”

Section: Anticipation Learning and Response Availabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Associative symmetry and memory theory

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines a basic question concerning the nature of episodic associations. On the one hand, associations can be viewed as directional pointers connecting different mental representations. While studying a pair of words in a memory experiment (A-B), subjects strengthen a pointer going from A to B and a separate one going from B to A, thus forming two distinct unidirectional associations. This view maps onto the classic independent association hypothesis (IAH), which viewed forward and backward associations as distinct, separately modifiable (e.g., Ebbinghaus,1885Ebbinghaus, /1913Robinson, 1932), and even statistically independent (Wolford, 1971).Arguing against the IAH, Gestalt theorists promoted a principle of associative symmetry (Asch & Ebenholtz, 1962;Köhler, 1947). This alternate view saw an episodically formed association is a holistic conjunction of the A and B representations, without any directional A®B or B®A pointers. According to this associative symmetry hypothesis (ASH), each member of the associated pair can recover the entire pattern, independent of the order of presentation (Asch, 1968;Asch & Ebenholtz, 1962;Rock & Ceraso, 1964). Experimental evidence on the equality of forward and backward associative recall, discussed below, and the arguments in favor of one-trial associative learning (e.g., Estes, 1960;Rock, 1957) lent support to this position.With the ascent of computational and distributed memory models, this basic question concerning the nature of episodic associations gained renewed importance. Distributed memory models make explicit assumptions about the mechanisms of association. As we will show in this article, some models assume symmetrical associative learning of item representations, whereas other models allow for separate formation of forward and backward associations.Studies aimed at discriminating the IAH from the ASH examined the dependence of recall on the temporal order of encoding.This was examined by using the classic pairedassociate method. Subjects studied randomly paired meaningful items, denoted A-B, in temporal succession. Then the experimenter tested each pair by either probing with A for recall of B (a forward test) or probing with B for recall of A (a backward test). A finding of asymmetric retrieval (e.g., better forward than backward recall) was seen as evidence against ASH and in favor of IAH. Similarly, a failure to find the expectedasymmetry result was taken as support for the ASH, at least on grounds of parsimony (e.g., Asch & Ebenholtz, 1962;Murdock, 1962).Even if forward and backward recall are equivalent on average, this does not strictly imply symmetry. Rather, the ASH requires that for every studied pair, A-B, the probability of recalling B given A perfectly predicts the probability of recalling A given B. That is, the correlation between forward and backward recall, at the level of individual pairs, must be 1.0. At the other extreme, the IAH (e.g., Wolford, 1971) implies a correlation of 0.0 between forward and backward recall.Although there ha...

show abstract

Section: Anticipation Learning and Response Availabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Associative symmetry and memory theory

2002

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For triples, asymmetries can arise from various types of associative interference or target ambiguity (Caplan, 2004;Kahana and Caplan, 2002). For pairs, breakdowns in symmetric means have been linked to differential treatment of the A versus B items (e.g., Horowitz et al 1964Horowitz et al , 1966Kahana, 2000Kahana, , 2002Lockhart, 1969;Wollen, Fox, and Lowry, 1970). It is possible that, to some extent, the presence of triples induced participants to study or rehearse the A and B items of pairs differently.…”

Section: Associative Symmetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, on repetitions, participants might recognize the repeated first ("A") item and then play a "serial anticipation" game for the remaining two items. This would be expected to progressively enhance what Horwitz and colleagues termed "item availability" (Horowitz et al, 1964(Horowitz et al, , 1966. That is, participants would have more experience (covertly) producing the second ("B") items than first items, and the third ("C") items than the second items.…”

Section: Associative Symmetrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Complementary to the correlation between forward and backward probes, researchers have long observed that the mean accuracy on backward probes of pairs is nearly equal to that on forward probes of pairs (Asch & Ebenholtz, 1962;Horowitz, Brown, & Weissbluth, 1964;Horowitz, Norman, & Day, 1966;Köhler 1947;Murdock, 1962Murdock, , 1965Murdock, , 1966; reviewed by Kahana, 2002). In contrast, Kahana and Caplan (2002) found that cued recall of both 3-word (triples) and 19-word lists showed an overall accuracy and response time advantage for forward probes.…”

Section: Dissociations Between Associative and Serial List Memorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These authors used this high forwardbackward correlation to support the notion that pairs are learned as holistic units, a notion that was termed associative symmetry (Köhler 1947;Asch & Ebenholtz, 1962). In contrast, in cued recall of 19-word lists, previously learned to a criterion of perfect serial recall (Kahana & Caplan, 2002), the correlation between forward and backward probe accuracy took on a lower, midrange value (Caplan, 2005).Complementary to the correlation between forward and backward probes, researchers have long observed that the mean accuracy on backward probes of pairs is nearly equal to that on forward probes of pairs (Asch & Ebenholtz, 1962;Horowitz, Brown, & Weissbluth, 1964;Horowitz, Norman, & Day, 1966;Köhler 1947;Murdock, 1962Murdock, , 1965Murdock, , 1966 reviewed by Kahana, 2002). In contrast, Kahana and Caplan (2002) found that cued recall of both 3-word (triples) and 19-word lists showed an overall accuracy and response time advantage for forward probes.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Linking associative and serial list memory: Pairs versus triples.

Caplan

Glaholt

McIntosh

2006

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Paired associates and serial list memory are typically investigated separately. An "isolation principle" (J. B. Caplan, 2005) was proposed to explain behavior in both paradigms by using a single model, in which serial list and paired associates memory differ only in how isolated pairs of items are from interference from other studied items. In the present study, 2 experiments identify a critical dissociation between the 2 paradigms, challenging this unified account. Specifically, forward and backward probes were highly correlated for pairs and less so for short lists (triples). The authors asked whether the isolation principle could quantitatively accommodate this type of dissociation. A simulation confirmed that a single model incorporating the isolation principle can adequately explain this and other dissociations, supporting the common processes view.Paired associates and serial list memory paradigms have much in common. Memory for associations tests whether participants can remember that two items are linked (usually by having been presented at adjacent times during a study episode). Memory for serial lists also requires participants to recall the relationships among items, but serial lists include more than two items. One important difference is that with a pair of items, AB, order is irrelevant for many types of memory probes. For example, consider cued recall. When presented with one item of the pair, the participant need only recall the other item, regardless of whether it was the first or second item. In contrast, when presented with a single item from a list of three items, ABC, the participant may require some order information to recall the actual target item and rule out the third, incorrect item. Memory investigators have generally asked questions about associative memory and serial list memory in separate studies, underlining their differences. But models that account for a broad range of data have more explanatory value. If it could be shown that there are common mechanisms underlying behavior in both associative and serial list memory, then researchers could not only explain behavior in those two paradigms, but also potentially explain behavior in related and hybrid paradigms. By investigating associative and serial list memory together, we identify how performance on the two paradigms is similar and how it differs (Experiments 1 and 2), and test whether a single model can account for both the similarities and differences in behavior by using identical model processes (Simulation).The notion that associative and serial list memory are closely related dates back to Ebbinghaus's (1885Ebbinghaus's ( /1913) chaining model. In chaining, the participant learns a list by encoding item-to-item associations between neighboring items in the list (and sometimes between pairs of items separated by a lag): ͕A-B, B-C, C-D, D-E, E-F, . . .͖,where letters denote items (e.g., nouns) and the dash symbol denotes a learned association. The participant could retrieve the list by starting at the first item, A, using ...

show abstract

Conditioning Methods, USA

Creelman

1966

The Experimental Investigation of Meaning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Availability and the direction of associations.

Cited by 30 publications

References 12 publications

Associative symmetry and memory theory

Associative symmetry and memory theory

Linking associative and serial list memory: Pairs versus triples.

Conditioning Methods, USA

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About