Part-set cuing facilitation for spatial information.

Abstract

Part-set cuing inhibition refers to the counterintuitive finding that hints--specifically, part of the set of to-be-remembered information--often impair memory performance in free recall tasks. Although inhibition is the most commonly reported result, part-set cuing facilitation has been shown with serial order tasks. The present study examined the influence of part-set cuing for spatial locations using novel methods and materials. Participants viewed the construction of Snap Circuit objects and then attempted to reconstruct the objects in either the presence or absence of part-set cues. Two experiments revealed robust part-set cuing facilitation on the spatial memory tasks. Generally, these results are consistent with the predictions of the retrieval strategy disruption hypothesis (e.g., D. R. Basden & Basden, 1995) and the 2- and 3-mechanism accounts of part-set cuing (Bäuml & Aslan, 2006; Bäuml & Samenieh, 2012).

Supporting older and younger adults’ memory for recent everyday events: A prospective sampling study using SenseCam

“…Significant inhibitory effects of part-set cueing have been found for shopping lists (Bovee, Fitz, Yehl, & Kelley, 2009) and expository text (Fritz & Morris, 2015) but for other stimuli, such as chess board layouts, uncategorised word lists, serial order, and complex scenes, partset cues have been found to have either no effect or a facilitative effect on subsequent recall (Cole, Reysen, & Kelley, 2013;Fritz & Morris, 2015;Serra & Nairne, 2000;Slamecka, 1969;Watkins, Schwartz, & Lane, 1984). If the inhibitory effect of part-set cueing is assumed to arise from either the disruption of a preferred retrieval strategy or response competition during retrieval (e.g.…”

The influence of the number of part-set cues on order retention

“…In the last two decades, however, researchers also have examined the effects of part-set cueing with tests of serial recall, reconstruction of order, and reconstruction of spatial location (e.g., B. H. Basden et al, 2002;Cole et al, 2013;Drinkwater et al, 2006;Fritz & Morris, 2015;Kelley & Bovee, 2007;Kelley et al, 2014Kelley et al, , 2016Kelley & Parihar, 2018;Serra & Nairne, 2000). With garden-variety tests of reconstruction of order, reconstruction of spatial location, and serial recall, the modal result is part-set cueing facilitation.…”

“…With garden-variety tests of reconstruction of order, reconstruction of spatial location, and serial recall, the modal result is part-set cueing facilitation. That is, when the part-set cues are placed in their original positions or locations, participants perform significantly better in the presence of part-set cues than in their absence; or, more intuitively, these hints tend to enhance performance (e.g., B. H. Basden et al, 2002;Cole et al, 2013;Serra & Nairne, 2000).…”

On the composition of part-set cues

“…Although “free” recall tests are the most common retention measure employed by researchers (e.g., see Nickerson, 1984, for a review), a growing literature has explored the effects of part-set cues using tests of serial recall, reconstruction of order, and reconstruction of location (e.g., B. H. Basden, Basden, & Stephens, 2002; Cole, Reysen, & Kelley, 2013; Drinkwater, Dagnall, & Parker, 2006; Fritz & Morris, 2015; Kelley & Bovee, 2007; Kelley, Parasiuk, Salgado-Benz, & Crocco, 2016; Kelley, Pentz, & Reysen, 2014; Serra & Nairne, 2000; Watkins, Schwartz, & Lane, 1984). Part-set cueing has also been explored with semantic memory tasks (Kelley & Parihar, 2018) and incidental memory tasks (Peynircioğlu & Moro, 1995).…”

“…1 In contrast, part-set cueing facilitation is the modal result in the typical serial recall, reconstruction of order, and reconstruction of position tasks, provided that the cues are placed properly in their original positions or locations (e.g., B. H. Basden et al, 2002; Cole et al, 2013; Serra & Nairne, 2000).…”