Testing effects in the recognition of words

Underwood, Benton J.; Freund, Joel S.

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(70)80018-4

Cited by 59 publications

(43 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At first glance, our results appear to be in conflict with those of Underwood and Freund (1970), who reported an effect of distractor familiarity. The differences between their paradigm and ours are too great to permit any firm conclusions about this disparity.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…It is also possiblethat the multiple presentations of the distractor photo made the distractor more familiar and thus more likely to be misidentified. Underwood and Freund(1970) documented the increase in false alarms that can result from repeatedly presenting distractors. In severalexperiments, subjects learnedword lists and were later given a two-alternative recognition test.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Some deleterious consequences of the act of recollection

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments investigated the impact of responding to recognition test items that do not include a correct alternative. In Experiment 1, subjects who were given exclusively incorrect response alternatives were less likely than control subjects to favor the correct alternatives on a second recognition test. Analysis of subjects' responses indicated that commitments, rather than distractor familiarity, was the main source of this effect. In Experiment 2, an impairing effect of committing to an incorrect alternative was observed even when the initial distractors were excluded from the final test. Thus, this decreased performance cannot simply be attributed to a bias toward remaining consistent. One interpretation of these results is that committing to a distractor causes subjects to remember a false detail that can interfere with their later ability to access the original information. Other potential theoretical and applied implications of these results are explored.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Some deleterious consequences of the act of recollection

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Old/new recognition tests require subjects to differentiate between items that were and were not presented during a study phase, whereas source monitoring tests require subjects to differentiate between items that were presented via different sources during a study phase. A number of memory researchers have explored questions relevant to the relationship between recognition and source monitoring (e.g., Anderson & Bower, 1974;Atkinson & Juola, 1973;Jacoby, Woloshyn, & Kelley, 1989;Johnson & Raye, 1981;Mandler, 1980;Raye, 1976;Underwood & Freund, 1970;Winograd, 1968), and, taken together, their work suggests that the relationship between these tasks will depend on the specifics of the situation.We have often found that old/new recognition is unaffected by manipulations that clearly alter source monitoring accuracy. For example, in Lindsay et al (1990), subjects were more likely to misremember which of two people had made a particular statement if the two people were similar to one another rather than dissimilar, but this similarity manipulation had no effect on recognition memory for the statements.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition memory and source monitoring

Lindsay

Johnson

1991

Bull. Psychon. Soc.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study demonstrates a manipulation that has opposite effects on old/new recognition and source monitoring. Deep processing of target items improved performance on an old/new recognition test in which subjects were to discriminate between targets and new distractors, but it impaired performance on a source monitoring test in which subjects were to discriminate between targets and distractors that had also been deeply processed during the experimental session. We argue that the relationship between old/new recognition and source monitoring varies with the specifics of the situation. The aspects of memories that support recognition judgments are not necessarily the same as those that support source monitoring judgments, and memory performance is the joint product of what is stored in memory and how memory is tested.According to the source monitoring model, event memories are attributed to particular sources in one's past experience by means of decision processes performed (often without awareness) during remembering (see, e.g., Hashtroudi, Johnson, & Chrosniak, 1989;Johnson, 1988;Lindsay & Johnson, 1987;Lindsay, Johnson, & Kwon, 1990). The term source refers to a variety of attributes that, collectively, specify the conditions under which an event memory was acquired (e.g., its spatial and temporal context, medium, modality, etc.) . Source monitoring processes are involved in the remembering of such things as where and when an event occurred, how it was perceived, and who and what were involved in it. Reality monitoring decisions-discriminations between memories of actual perceived events and memories of imagined, internally generated events-represent a particularly intriguing type of source discrimination (Johnson & Raye, 1981).Support for the hypothesis that memories are attributed to particular sources via decision-making during remembering comes from a variety of studies that have demonstrated effects of memory content on source monitoring accuracy. Most of these studies have consisted of a study phase, during which subjects receive information from different sources, followed by a test phase, in which subjects are tested on their ability to identify the source of particular test items. In general, we have found that manipulations that increase the similarity between to-bediscriminated sources lower source monitoring perforCorrespondence concerning this manuscript may be addressed to Marcia Johnson, Department of Psychology, Green Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, or to D. Stephen Lindsay, Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4K I, Canada.mance (see Johnson, 1988, andJohnson &Raye, 1981, for reviews of these studies and discussions of their relation to other areas of the memory literature).What is the relationship between source monitoring and old/new recognition? Both tasks require that subjects discriminate between test items on the basis of their prior experience with those items. Old/new recognition tests require subjects to differentiate between items that...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Recognition memory and source monitoring

Lindsay

Johnson

1991

Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study demonstrates a manipulation that has opposite effects on old/new recognition and source monitoring. Deep processing of target items improved performance on an old/new recognition test in which subjects were to discriminate between targets and new distractors, but it impaired performance on a source monitoring test in which subjects were to discriminate between targets and distractors that had also been deeply processed during the experimental session. We argue that the relationship between old/new recognition and source monitoring varies with the specifics of the situation. The aspects of memories that support recognition judgments are not necessarily the same as those that support source monitoring judgments, and memory performance is the joint product of what is stored in memory and how memory is tested.According to the source monitoring model, event memories are attributed to particular sources in one's past experience by means of decision processes performed (often without awareness) during remembering (see, e.g., Hashtroudi, Johnson, & Chrosniak, 1989;Johnson, 1988;Lindsay & Johnson, 1987;Lindsay, Johnson, & Kwon, 1990). The term source refers to a variety of attributes that, collectively, specify the conditions under which an event memory was acquired (e.g., its spatial and temporal context, medium, modality, etc.). Source monitoring processes are involved in the remembering of such things as where and when an event occurred, how it was perceived, and who and what were involved in it. Reality monitoring decisions-discriminations between memories of actual perceived events and memories of imagined, internally generated events-represent a particularly intriguing type of source discrimination (Johnson & Raye, 1981).Support for the hypothesis that memories are attributed to particular sources via decision-making during remembering comes from a variety of studies that have demonstrated effects of memory content on source monitoring accuracy. Most of these studies have consisted of a study phase, during which subjects receive information from different sources, followed by a test phase, in which subjects are tested on their ability to identify the source of particular test items. In general, we have found that manipulations that increase the similarity between to-bediscriminated sources lower source monitoring perforCorrespondence concerning this manuscript may be addressed to Marcia Johnson, Department of Psychology, Green Hall, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, or to D. Stephen Lindsay, Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4Kl, Canada.mance (see Johnson, 1988, andJohnson &Raye, 1981, for reviews of these studies and discussions of their relation to other areas of the memory literature).What is the relationship between source monitoring and old/new recognition? Both tasks require that subjects discriminate between test items on the basis of their prior experience with those items. Old/new recognition tests require subjects to differentiate between items that w...

show abstract

Testing effects in the recognition of words

Cited by 59 publications

References 3 publications

Some deleterious consequences of the act of recollection

Some deleterious consequences of the act of recollection

Recognition memory and source monitoring

Recognition memory and source monitoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About