"Fate" of first-list associations in transfer theory.

Barnes, Jean M.; Underwood, Benton J.

doi:10.1037/h0047507

Cited by 538 publications

(444 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

412

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this vein, the modified-modified free recall test (MMFR) was designed to eliminate response competition by asking participants to recall responses from both lists and then to identify the list from which the responses originated (e.g., Barnes & Underwood, 1959). In an A-B, A-B' paradigm for which responses in the two lists were strongly associated (e.g., afraid, scared), Barnes and Underwood found that recall was facilitated and that participants' ability to identify the list origins of responses was extremely high.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall

Jacoby

Wahlheim

2013

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Suppose that you were asked which of two movies you had most recently seen. The results of the experiments reported here suggest that your answer would be more accurate if, when viewing the later movie, you were reminded of the earlier one. In the present experiments, we investigated the role of remindings in recency judgments and cued-recall performance. We did this by presenting a list composed of two instances from each of several different categories and later asking participants to select (Exp. 1) or to recall (Exp. 2) the more recently presented instance. Reminding was manipulated by varying instructions to look back over memory of earlier instances during the presentation of later instances. As compared to a control condition, cued-recall performance revealed facilitation effects when remindings occurred and were later recollected, but interference effects in their absence. The effects of reminding on recency judgments paralleled those on cued recall of more recently presented instances. We interpret these results as showing that reminding produces a recursive representation that embeds memory for an earlier-presented category instance into that of a later-presented one and, thereby, preserves their temporal order. Large individual differences in the probabilities of remindings and of their later recollection were observed. The widespread importance of recursive reminding for theory and for applied purposes is discussed.Keywords Recursive remindings . Recency judgments . Cued recall Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards. -Søren Kierkegaard (1869/1996 Although life must be lived forward, memory can serve as a source of assistance when dealing with the present and planning for the future. As an example, being reminded of a prior event by the occurrence of a later event can influence the encoding and subsequent memory of both the earlier and the later events (e.g., Wahlheim & Jacoby, 2013). However, such reminding is not likely to always be spontaneous, but instead may sometimes rely on purposeful looking back to the past. In the present article, we examine the importance of looking back for judgments of recency and for performance when participants are asked to recall the most recently presented instance of a category. For both types of task, we show that looking back, along with resultant remindings, are important for performance and can be brought under task control.We begin by describing the importance of reminding for a variety of memory tasks, and then consider advantages of bringing remindings under task control as a means of investigating their effects. To anticipate, we show that as compared to a control condition, proactive facilitation is found in cued recall of the most recently presented instance of a category in the presence of recollection of a prior reminding, whereas proactive interference is found in its absence. In the General Discussion, we describe the widespread importance of remindings and discuss results suggestive of large individual difference...

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall

Jacoby

Wahlheim

2013

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both response unavailability and associative unlearning have been demonstrated in the A-B, A-C paradigm through the use of modified recall and S-R matChing tests (e.g., Barnes & Underwood, 1959;McGovern, 1964). Only response unavailability thus far has been shown to depend on degree of interpolated learning (Barnes & Underwood, 1959).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Only response unavailability thus far has been shown to depend on degree of interpolated learning (Barnes & Underwood, 1959). In all but one of the studies employing the S-R matching test, degree of IL was not manipulated.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Associative unlearning as a function of degree of interpolated learning

Sandak

Garskof

1967

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Two paired associate lists used by Barnes & Underwood (1959) were utilized in the present experiment. Stimuli were eight CVC syllables, and responses were two-syllable adjectives from the Haagen (1949) list, chosen to minimize apparent intra-and inter-list response similarity.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Response availability in the A-B, A-C paradigm

Garskof

1967

Psychon Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Fate" of first-list associations in transfer theory.

Cited by 538 publications

References 7 publications

On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall

On the importance of looking back: The role of recursive remindings in recency judgments and cued recall

Associative unlearning as a function of degree of interpolated learning

Response availability in the A-B, A-C paradigm

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About