Recognition memory for random shapes as a function of complexity, association value, and delay.

Abstract

12 groups of 24 Ss each were examined on 2 tests at 3 delays for recognition accuracy of random shapes having 2 levels of complexity and 2 levels of association value (A). A measure of form coding was also taken. Forms of high A were more accurately recognized than forms of low A, and a 2nd recognition test on the same forms resulted in a practice effect for simple but not for complex forms. All delay effects were insignificant. Complex form coding was positively related to A. Simple form coding was infrequent and not related to A. Coding was positively related to recognition accuracy for complex forms only. Conclusions were: (a) Ss probably stored an image of the entire shape of simple, but not of complex forms; (b) complex forms were presumably remembered by making associations to them.

Interference and facilitation in short-term memory for odors

“…The effect holds for words (Craik & Lockhart, 1972), faces (Bower & Karlin, 1974;Warrington & Ackroyd, 1975), colors (Brown & Lenneberg, 1954), complex forms (Clark, 1965;Daniel & Ellis, 1972), environmental sounds (Bartlett, 1977), pictures (Bower, Karlin, & Dueck, 1975;Freedman & Haber, 1974), and now odors (Rabin & Cain, 1984). The present experiment extends this knowledge by showing that short-term odor recognition may also benefit from semantic encoding.…”

Remembered duration: Effects of event and sequence complexity

“…Future research might use different kinds of stimuli and at least several levels of complexity in an attempt to determine whether or not the complexity of individual stimulus events does influence remembered duration in a predictable way. Like some previous studies (e.g., Clark, 1965), Experiment 1 found no effect of stimulus complexity on recognition memory. This suggests that data that show an effect of event complexity on remembered duration cannot be explained in terms of Ornstein's storage size hypothesis, which regards memory for individual stimulus events as important.…”

“…There was no significant effect of type of pattern on recognition memory [F{1,58) = 3.22, MSe = .036, p > .05]. Others (e.g., Clark, 1965) also have found no effect of stimulus complexity on recognition performance. However, performance was significantly greater than zero, or "chance," for the simple patterns, but not for the complex ones (means of .085 and .023, respectively).…”

Variables underlying the recognition of random shapes

“…For example, in a study that was published a few years ago (Clark, 1965), groups of Ss observed 10 simple or 10 complex shapes of high or low association value, and later attempted to recognize them in a forced-choice recognition test. Figures I and 2 show the shapes used in that study.…”