Retrieval Independence 06 February

Retrieval Independence 06 February - A. Glass Retrieval...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: A. Glass Retrieval independence in successive tasks 1 THE DEPENDENCE OF RECALL UPON RECOGNITION: EVIDENCE FROM SUCCESSIVE MEMORY TESTS Arnold L. Glass Kristine Wilckens Rutgers University Rutgers University Mailing address: Arnold L. Glass Psychology Department Rutgers University New Brunswick NJ 8903 Phone: 732 739 0346 E-mail: aglass@rutgers.edu Running head: RECOGNITION AND RECALL A. Glass Retrieval independence in successive tasks 2 Abstract Participants studied AB word pairs and completed three yes/no recognition tests and one cued recall task. In the three recognition tasks, participants had to identify the A words, the B words, and the entire AB study pair, respectively. Recognition of the A, B and AB targets for a given study pair were largely independent of each other. These results were predicted by a model derived from the hypothesis that single-word and AB targets had independent representations in memory. After the recognition tests, half the participants had to recall each B word when presented with the A word, while the remaining participants had to recall each A word in response to the B word. The results were predicted by a model derived from the hypothesis that recall depended on generating the entire AB pair in response to the single-word cue. Collectively, the results support the hypothesis that there are two learning and memory subsystems that operate independently of each other: one for familiar inputs such as words and one for novel inputs such as novel word pairs. A. Glass Retrieval independence in successive tasks 3 Independence of Retrieval in Successive Recognition and Recall Tasks Consider an experiment in which the study of AB word pairs is followed by successive recognition tests of the B word and the entire AB word pair. It seems reasonable to assume that there should be a high degree of dependence between the B and AB recognition tests. However, this turns out not to be the case. Originally, Gardiner (1994) found Yules Qs for successive yes/no recognition tests that ranged from .51 to .69. Glass, Lian, & Helstrup (2003) and Glass, Lian, & Buyske (2006) found even more independence between B and AB forced-choice recognition tests. Glass et al. (2003) found Yules Qs for successive forced-choice recognition tests that ranged from .12 to .26 for the raw data and Glass et al. (2006) found Yules Qs for successive forced-choice recognition tests that ranged from 0 to .02 when they applied their correction procedure to the data that will be discussed below. Furthermore, Glass et al. (2003) found that independence between single word and pair recognition was robust over a variety of conditions. One way compare single word and pair recognition is to use an associative recognition test for the pairs. That is, distractors are created by re-pairing the A and B words of the targets. This A. Glass Retrieval independence in successive tasks 4 condition optimizes the possibility of independence between single word and pair...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 04/05/2009 for the course PSYCHOLOGY 830 taught by Professor 346 during the Spring '09 term at Rutgers.

Page1 / 68

Retrieval Independence 06 February - A. Glass Retrieval...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online