Capturing conceptual implicit memory: The time it takes to produce an association

Abstract

Conceptual implicit memory is demonstrated when, in the absence of explicit retrieval, performance on a task requiring conceptual processing benefits more from prior conceptual encoding than from prior nonconceptual encoding. In the present study, we sought to provide an improved measure of conceptual implicit memory by minimizing contamination from explicit retrieval. On a modified word association test, participants freeassociated to the actually studied items, with response time to produce any associate serving as the dependent measure. Experiment 1 varied whether words were read or generated at study and showed that generated words were associated to more quickly than were read words. Experiment 2 varied level of processing at study and showed that words processed semantically were associated to more quickly than were words processed nonsemantically. With modifications to ensure its implicit nature, a conceptual implicit test can be consistently affected by the same encoding manipulations as those that affect conceptual explicit memory tests.

Does survival processing enhance implicit memory?

“…We chose this task because (1) we wanted to use the same set of study items as in Experiment 1, in which half of our study items were concrete words and half were abstract words, (2) this task taps the meaning of test items, (3) the speeded nature of this task could minimize opportunities for using explicit retrieval strategies (see, e.g., Hourihan & MacLeod, 2007, for a discussion), and (4) the binary responses (as well as test awareness (test aware vs. test unaware) and intentionality to retrieve (intend vs. not intend to retrieve studied items during the test): aware-intend (n 34), awareunintend (n 128), and unaware-unintend (n 18). Since individuals who were unaware of the nature of the memory test did not claim that they retrieved the studied items on the memory test, there was no unaware-intend participant.…”

“…However, this idea should be further validated in conceptual implicit memory tests that have been reported to yield the levels-of-processing effect (e.g., a modified free association task in Hourihan & MacLeod, 2007). If a survival-processing advantage still did not occur for those tests, one would be more confident that the survival-processing advantage in explicit memory was not just another levels-of-processing effect.…”

Capturing spontaneous trait inference with the modified free association paradigm

“…6 were males and the mean age of the sample was 19.46 (SD = 1.28) years old. In this experiment, the criteria used to decide the minimal sample size was based on the sample size reported by Hourihan and MacLeod (2007) in their first study (N = 30). The data, in this and in the following experiments, was only analyzed after the reported samples were complete.…”

“…In the following section we present a new paradigm to measure STI that solves both problems. Hourihan and MacLeod's (2007) modified word association paradigm is a conceptually-driven measure of implicit memory that seems to overcome most of the limitations of the paradigms presented above. In their study, in the learning phase, participants either generated words from meaningful cues (e.g., "the piece of furniture used for sitting -c?")…”

“…Following Hourihan and MacLeod's (2007) rationale, we predicted that the trait-implying sentence will prime the semantic network of the trait word and lead to faster generation of an associate when compared to unprimed traits presented in the control condition.…”