Intrusions in Episodic Recall: Age Differences in Editing of Overt Responses

Abstract

Two experiments compared episodic word-list recall of young and older adults. In Experiment 1, using standard free-recall procedures, older adults recalled significantly fewer correct items and made significantly more intrusions (recall of items that had not appeared on the target list) than younger adults. In Experiment 2, we introduced a new method, called externalized free recall, in which participants were asked to recall any items that came to mind during the recall period but to indicate with an immediate key press those items they could identify as intrusions. Both age groups generated a large number of intrusions, but older adults were significantly less likely than young adults to identify these as nonlist items. Results suggest that an editing deficit may be a contributor to age differences in episodic recall and that externalized free recall may be a useful tool for testing computationally explicit models of episodic recall.

Effects of age on contextually mediated associations in paired associate learning.

“…Consistent with previous findings, the older adults demonstrated comparatively lower overall correct recall rates (Naveh-Benjamin, 2000; Kahana et al, 2005) and made more extra-list intrusions than younger adults . To circumvent group differences in recall output other studies of associative learning have employed recognition paradigms (Naveh-Benjamin, 2000;Naveh-Benjamin et al, 2003Bastin & Van der Linden, 2006;Castel & Craik, 2003;Light et al, 2004;Healy et al, 2005;Prull et al, 2006).…”

“…Consistent with previous findings, the older adults made more incorrect recalls (intrusions) than the younger adults (Kliegl & Lindenberger, 1993;Zacks, Radvansky, & Hasher, 1996;Balota et al, 1999;NavehBenjamin, 2000;Kahana et al, 2002Kahana et al, , 2005. Associative retrieval accounts of episodic memory characterize response generation as a process in which potential recalls are first sampled, followed by an editing process that should limit responses to those items that were part of the target list/pair (Raaijmakers & Shiffrin, 1981).…”

Understanding the dynamics of correct and error responses in free recall: Evidence from externalized free recall

“…Note that although some of these effects have been reported in previous studies, it was important to demonstrate them in the present study in order to get an overall picture of the dynamics of correct and error responses in the same data set. Furthermore, as was noted by Kahana et al (2005), more research is needed to determine the extent to which similar effects (e.g., serial position and probability of first recall functions) are found in standard free recall and EFR.…”

“…To get around this limitation, we utilized an externalized free recall (EFR) task that has been used previously (Bousfield & Rosner, 1970;Kahana, Dolan, Sauder, & Wingfield, 2005;Roediger & Payne, 1985;Rosen & Engle, 1997;Unsworth & Brewer, in press). In EFR, participants are instructed to recall all of the words from the current list in a manner similar to that in standard free recall.…”

“…Furthermore, in order to examine editing processes within EFR, Kahana et al (2005) instructed participants to press a key immediately after any response that the participant knew was incorrect. Thus, in this version of EFR, participants are free to generate all items that come to mind (both correct and error responses) and can indicate whether they identify the item as a correct or an error response.…”