Restricted associates as cues in free recall

Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory.

“…Even if the subject does not have the foggiest notion that CHAIR occurred in the listthe stored information has been completely wiped out, or he never saw the word in the list-he can, if he chooses to guess, or is so instructed by the experimenter (e.g., Bahrick, 1969;Fox, Blick, & Bilodeau, 1964;Freund & Underwood, 1970), boost the correspondence between the input list and his output protocol by thinking of and producing words semantically related to the cue word table and thus create the appearance of recalling the specific word event from the list.…”

“…Although the possibility of semantic guessing is sometimes mentioned in connection with the interpretation of extralist cuing effects (e.g., Freund & Underwood, 1970), and although it is difficult to deny that some subjects in some episodic memory experiments may utilize information from semantic memory only, the theory cannot be taken seriously for at least two reasons. First, subjects on their own seldom resort to the strategy of semantic guessing in an episodic memory task, as evidenced by the fact that in most extralist cuing experiments a large majority of recall errors consists of plain omissions.…”

“…This theory was mentioned as a possible explanation of extralist cuing results by Freund and Underwood (1970). Although these authors rejected it, since they thought their own data did not demonstrate a "true" extralist cuing effect, the theory is quite plausible within the framework of current associative views of memory.…”

Cognitive Processes and Learner Strategies in the Acquisition of Motor Skills

“…For example, in a movement reproduction task, if a retrieval cue elicits recall of material that was not part of the present learning situation, but was acquired at an earlier date, the obtained retention results are obviously not a function of the learner's ability to retrieve newly learned information. The same results could be due to high probability guessing (Freund & Underwood, 1970), in which case performance scores on the retention test would not reflect the relationship between the retrieval strategy and the specific information which was to have been learned. The possibility of one retrieval cue which leads to the recall of several acquired memories is not to be viewed too negatively, however.…”

Frequency and recency in cued recall: Interaction of old and new learning.

“…The limiting case of a directed search process is direct access. An example of such a process derives from the assumption that the presentation of the target word on the study trial may implicitly elicit the cue (see Freund & Underwood, 1970). When this occurs, the association from the cue to the target is assumed to be strengthened.…”