Recognition processes in episodic memory.

Moeser, Shannon Dawn

doi:10.1037/h0081650

Cited by 52 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With appropriate instructions, subjects do attempt to obtain the gist of scrambled stories, and they meet with some success -though less than with unscrambled (normal) ones Kieras, 1978Kieras, , 1981Kintsch, Mandel, & Kozminsky, 1977;Mandler, 1978;Schwartz & Flammer, 1981;Stein & Glenn, 1979;Thorndyke, 1977). Indeed, the probability of integration is lowered simply by separating what should ordinarily be consecutive units (Frase, 1975;Hayes-Roth & Thorndyke, 1979;Moeser, 1977Moeser, , 1979Walker & Meyer, 1980). Second, the scrambling manipulation provided an empirical test of the processing shift hypothesis because stimuli presented in a scrambled order, by definition, are relatively incongruent.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface information loss in comprehension

Gernsbacher

1985

Cognitive Psychology

228

185

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shortly after a sentence has been comprehended, information about its exact surface form (e.g., its word order) becomes less available. The present research demonstrated this phenomenon during the comprehension of nonverbal stimuli (picture stories). In Experiment 1, significantly more surface (left/right orientation) information was lost after comprehending several picture stories than just one; in Experiment 2, more was lost after comprehending an entire picture story than half of one. In Experiment 3, subjects segmented the picture stories into their constituents; in Experiment 4, significantly more surface information was lost after crossing these constituents' boundaries than before. The present research also investigated why surface information is lost. Four explanations were considered: Surface information loss is the result of performing grammatical transformations (the linguistic hypothesis), exceeding short-term memory limitations (the memory limitations hypothesis), integrating information into gist (the integration hypothesis), shifting from building one substructure to initiating another (the processing shift hypothesis). The linguistic and memory limitations hypotheses were considered inadequate; the integration and the processing shift hypotheses were tested in the last set of experiments. In Experiment 5 (using nonverbal stimuli), the predictions made by the processing shift hypothesis were confirmed; in Experiment 6 (using verbal stimuli), these results were replicated. Other implications of the processing shift hypothesis concerning surface information loss are discussed.A well-known phenomenon involved in language comprehension is this: Shortly after a passage is comprehended, information about the exact surface form of its sentences (e.g., their word order) becomes less available. By far the most cited demonstration of this phenomenon is Sachs ' (1967). Her subjects listened to a narrative story that included a sentence such as 1. He sent a letter about it to Galileo, the great Italian scientist.After comprehending this sentence, subjects decided whether it or Sentence 2 was the sentence they just heard. 2A letter about it was sent to Galileo, the great Italian scientist.If subjects were tested immediately after hearing the target sentence, their ability to discriminate between it and its reversed form was around 90%. However, if they were tested after comprehending only 80 additional syllables, performance fell to just above chance.Requests for reprints should be sent to Dr. M. A. Gernsbacher,

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface information loss in comprehension

Gernsbacher

1985

Cognitive Psychology

228

185

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differential recognition would imply that a story has been processed with respect to a story structure schema and that a macrostructure (Kintsch & van Dijk, 1978) (Bransford & Franks, 1971;Moeser, 1976Moeser, , 1977 and can be used to aid in the verification (Reder, 1979) or recall (Masson, 1979) Intuitions about the relative degree of importance of the selected statements were evaluated by having a separate group of subjects from the introductory psjchology subject pool provide importance ratings. Twenty-seven subjects read each critical narrative and then evaluated each statement in its corresponding set of selected statements for importance to the general meaning of the story.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cognitive processes in skimming stories.

Masson

1982

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

for their guidance and contributions to this work. I am grateful to James Miller for his help in conducting the simulations reported in Experiment 4, and to Linda Sala for many important discussions about skimming and reading in general. I also thank Henry Roediger, Douglas Vipond, and an anonymous reviewer for their helpful editorial suggestions.Requests for reprints should be sent to Michael Masson,

show abstract

“…This is a presentation format that generally encourages subjects to store related items independently of each other (cf. Moeser, 1977). In most linear ordering experiments, the items are presented in a logical sequence, either from the greatest to the least or from the least to the greatest.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most linear ordering experiments, the items are presented in a logical sequence, either from the greatest to the least or from the least to the greatest. This type of presentation method generally encourages subjects to store related items as a single unit of information (e.g., Moeser, 1977Moeser, , 1978. When Moeser and Tarrant (I977) presented the comparisons from a partial ordering in such a way as to encourage their storage as a single unit, they found no difference in reaction times between adjacent and nonadjacent comparisons.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Acquiring complex partial orderings in comparison with acquiring similar-sized linear orderings

Moeser

1979

Memory & Cognition

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acquisition of a 14-term partial ordering was compared with the acquisition of a 14-term linear ordering. Learning the partial ordering was found to be more difficult because of two factors: (1) Subjects do not appear to have in their knowledge systems a prototype or rule for representing a long list of comparative relations as a partial ordering structure, and (2) the partial ordering must be presented so that some of the adjacently presented premises do not contain a common element. When these two factors were controlled, the partial ordering was as easy to learn as the linear ordering. It was also found that subjects learning the partial ordering showed no evidence of a serial position learning curve, whereas subjects learning the linear ordering showed some tendency to produce a serial position learning curve. linear ordering, however, an item can have at most two direct connections to other items, one "greater than" connection and one "less than" connection. Also, in a linear ordering there will always be two items that have only one direct connection to other items in the chain: the two ends of the chain. There have been many investigations of how linear order information is encoded and retrieved. In these studies, subjects are presented a set of propositions that describe a linear ordering of comparative relations. An example of such a set is "Mary is older than Judy, Judy is older than Anne, and Anne is older than Lynn." The information in these sentences can be combined to form a connected chain of premises; namely, "Mary is older than Judy who is older than Anne who is older than Lynn." Most investigations of linear orderings have concluded that subjects encode the information from this type of input into a single integrated construct. One line of evidence used to support this conclusion is the fmding of a serial position learning curve. In learning a set of individual comparisons, subjects make more errors on the pairs in the middle of the ordering than on those at the ends (e.g., Riley & Trabasso, 1974;Trabasso, Riley, & Wilson, 1975). Bower (1971) has argued that such effects are prima facie evidence of an integrated construction.However, the serial position learning curve has not been found with partial orderings of comparative relations. Like linear orderings, partial orderings involve a sequence of linked items that form a connected chain of premises. Unlike linear orderings, the chain involves branches. For example, compare the topographical properties of the simple linear ordering illustrated in Figure la with the partial ordering shown in Figure 1b. Both orderings contain 14 linked items and can be described by a set of 13 comparative premises. In the

show abstract

Recognition processes in episodic memory.

Abstract: Episodic theory proposes that when semantically related ideas are encoded into the episodic system, they will be stored independently of each other unless they are processed at the same

Cited by 52 publications

References 28 publications

Surface information loss in comprehension

Surface information loss in comprehension

Cognitive processes in skimming stories.

Acquiring complex partial orderings in comparison with acquiring similar-sized linear orderings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About