Development of dual-retrieval processes in recall: Learning, forgetting, and reminiscence

Abstract

We investigated the development of dual-retrieval processes with a low-burden paradigm that is suitable for research with children and neurocognitively impaired populations (e.g., older adults with mild cognitive impairment or dementia). Rich quantitative information can be obtained about recollection, reconstruction, and familiarity judgment by defining a Markov model over simple recall tasks like those that are used in clinical neuropsychology batteries. The model measures these processes separately for learning, forgetting, and reminiscence. We implemented this procedure in some developmental experiments, whose aims were (a) to measure age changes in recollective and nonrecollective retrieval during learning, forgetting, and reminiscence and (b) to measure age changes in content dimensions (e.g., taxonomic relatedness) that affect the two forms of retrieval. The model provided excellent fits in all three domains. Concerning (a), recollection, reconstruction, and familiarity judgment all improved during the child-to-adolescent age range in the learning domain, whereas only recollection improved in the forgetting domain, and the processes were age-invariant in the reminiscence domain. Concerning (b), although some elements of the adult pattern of taxonomic relatedness effects were detected by early adolescence, the adult pattern differs qualitatively from corresponding patterns in children and adolescents.

Developmental Differences in Memory During Early Childhood: Insights From Event‐Related Potentials

“…The finding that children's ability to behaviorally recall contextual details associated with events increases during early childhood is consistent with several previous studies in school-aged children (Bauer et al, 2012;Cycowicz et al, 2001;Ghetti et al, 2010;Hamond & Fivush, 1991;Riggins, 2014;Riggins et al, 2009aRiggins et al, , 2009bSluzenski et al, 2006; see also, Anooshian, 1999;Anooshian & Seibert, 1996;Billingsley et al, 2002;Brainerd et al, 2004;Brainerd et al, 2012;Friedman et al, 2010;Lloyd et al, 2009;Ghetti & Angelini, 2008;Ghetti et al, 2010). However, findings from the present study extend previous work by documenting that these changes are also accompanied by age-related increases in ERP amplitude late in the ERP response (i.e., between 800 and 1,000 ms) between 3 and 4 years of age, which suggests that the increase at the behavioral level may be due to increased resources at the neural level.…”

“…Novel paradigms (using behavioral, electrophysiological, or neuroimaging techniques) that allow for the distinction of these memory processes in early childhood are greatly needed and represent an important area for further research. Moreover, future studies should investigate whether similar memory networks are engaged at multiple developmental stages (e.g., infancy and early childhood; see Mecklinger et al., , for findings in school‐aged children and adolescents), as well as how long and under what conditions developmental changes are apparent (e.g., Brainerd et al., ; Friedman et al., ). Results from the present study represent an initial attempt to begin to distinguish age‐related differences in cognitive and neural processes supporting memory in early childhood, which is an important and necessary element to understanding the development of memory in general.…”

“…Developmental research suggests that recollection and familiarity follow different developmental trajectories in middle childhood and adolescence (e.g., Ghetti & Angelini, ). Data from these studies suggest that recollection develops well into the adolescent years, whereas familiarity shows comparatively little, if any, development after 6–8 years of age (Ghetti & Angelini, ; see also Anooshian, ; Anooshian & Seibert, ; Billingsley, Lou Smith, & Pat McAndrews, ; Brainerd, Aydin, & Reyna, ; Brainerd, Holliday, & Reyna, ; Cycowicz et al., ; Czernochowski, Mecklinger, Johansson, & Brinkmann, ; Drummey & Newcombe, ; Friedman, de Chastelaine, Nessler, & Malcolm, ; Ghetti et al., ; Mecklinger, Brunnemann, & Kipp, ). Although research in younger children (i.e., 1‐ to 3‐year‐old children) has documented that both familiarity and recollection contribute to memory in (e.g., Rose, Feldman, Jankowski, & Van Rossem, ), the developmental trajectories of these processes and their relative contribution to recognition memory early in life remain unknown (see Brainerd, Reyna, & Howe, ; Newcombe & Crowley, ; Riggins, , for similar arguments) and theoretical debates still exist regarding the nature of memory early in life (e.g., Nelson, ; Rovee‐Collier, ).…”

Subjective Experience of Episodic Memory and Metacognition: A Neurodevelopmental Approach

“…Many studies now suggest the existence of different developmental trajectories for the different components of episodic memory. In particular, recent studies have shown that familiarity-based processes develop earlier than recollection-based ones (Billingsley et al, 2002 ; Ghetti and Angelini, 2008 ; Brainerd et al, 2012 ). Research has also shown that recalling contextual information develops later than recalling the information itself (Cycowicz et al, 2001 , 2003 ; Pirogovsky et al, 2006 ).…”

Markovian interpretations of dual retrieval processes

“…With remember/know, for instance, subjects must read and comprehend complex instructions telling them how to introspect on their mental states, and they must implement those instructions accurately on recognition tests. Ghetti, Mirandola, Angelini, Cornoldi, and Ciaramelli (2008; cited in Ghetti, 2008) found that children could not follow even simplified versions of these instructions, and similar problems have been reported in studies of impaired older adults (Brainerd, Aydin, & Reyna, 2012). …”