|
|
- Absolute versus relative forgetting.
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Slamecka and McElree (1983) and Rivera-Lares et al. (2022), like others before them, factorially manipulated the number of learning trials and the retention interval. The results revealed two unsurprising main effects: (a) the more study trials, the higher the initial degree of learning, and (b) the longer the retention interval, the more items were forgotten. However, across many experiments, the interaction was not significant, a finding that is often interpreted to mean that the degree of learning is independent of the absolute rate of forgetting (i.e., the absolute number of items forgotten per unit time). Yet there is considerable tension between that interpretation and the fact that forgetting has long been characterized by a power law, according to which the absolute rate of forgetting is not a particularly meaningful measure. When the power function is fit to the same data, the results show that a higher degree of learning results in a lower relative (i.e., proportional) rate of forgetting. This raises an interesting question: which of the two definitions of “forgetting rate” (absolute vs. relative) is theoretically relevant' Here, I make the case that it is the relative rate of forgetting. Theoretically, the explanation of why a higher degree of learning is associated with a lower relative rate of forgetting may be related to why, as observed by Jost (1897) long ago, the passage of time itself is associated with a lower relative rate of forgetting. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 10 Nov 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001196
- When does working memory get better with longer time'
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Longer free time between presentation of verbal list items often leads to better immediate serial recall. The present series of three experiments demonstrates that this beneficial effect of time is more general than has been known: It is found for verbal items presented visually and auditorily (Experiments 1 and 2), and also when people engage in concurrent articulation during presentation, thereby preventing rehearsal (Experiment 3). The effect of time is to improve memory most strongly for the later part of the list, contrary to what is predicted from the assumption that time between items is used to bolster memory traces of already encoded items through rehearsal, refreshing, or elaboration. The data are compatible with a ballistic form of short-term consolidation, and with the assumption that encoding an item into working memory partially depletes a limited resource, which is replenished over time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 03 Nov 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001199
- Once established, goal reminders provide long-lasting and cumulative
benefits for lower working memory capacity individuals.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Previous research has shown that Stroop effects interact with working memory capacity (WMC) more strongly with lists of mostly congruent items. Although the predominant explanation for this relationship is goal maintenance, some research has challenged whether listwide effects truly reflect goal-maintenance abilities. The current study improved upon previous methodology by using both within-subject and between-subjects manipulations of goal reminder, increasing both the number of trials between reminders and the total length of the task to allow for greater goal neglect, and more precisely maintaining congruency proportion within each block. Participants completed the Automated Operation Span followed by a Stroop task in which they stopped every 24 trials to vocalize either a goal-reminder statement (“name the color not the word”) or a nongoal statement (“This is part of my intro to psychology class”). In the within-subject manipulation (Experiment 1), there was no consistent benefit for goal reminders over nongoal statements. However, in the between-subjects manipulation (Experiment 2), results demonstrated a strong benefit of goal reminders, such that goal reminders eliminated the relation between WMC and Stroop effects, whereas that relation was robust following nongoal statements. Moreover, the benefit of receiving goal reminders lasted for at least 24 trials and accumulated across the course of the experiment. These data provide strong evidence that goal reminders eliminate the relationship between WMC and Stroop errors and suggest goal reminders can be a useful intervention for those suffering from lapses in controlled attention. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001185
- Effects of letter case on processing sequences of written words.
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: In four experiments, we investigated the impact of letter case (lower case vs. UPPER CASE) on the processing of sequences of written words. Experiment 1 used the rapid parallel visual presentation (RPVP) paradigm with postcued identification of one word in a five-word sequence. The sequence could be grammatically correct (e.g., “the boy likes his bike”) or be an ungrammatical reordering of the same words (e.g., “his boy the bike likes the”). We replicated the standard sentence superiority effect (more accurate identification of target words when embedded in a grammatically correct sequence compared with ungrammatical sequences), and also found that lowercase presentation led to higher word identification accuracy, but equally so for the grammatical and ungrammatical sequences. This pattern suggests that the lowercase advantage was mostly operating at the level of individual word identification. The following three experiments used the grammatical decision task to provide an examination of letter case effects on more global sentence processing measures. All these experiments revealed a significant lowercase advantage in grammatical decisions, independently of the nature of the ungrammatical sequence (Experiments 2 and 3) and independently of whether or not the letter case manipulation was blocked (Experiment 4). The size of the effects observed in grammatical decisions again points to individual word identification as the primary locus of the lowercase advantage. We conclude that letter case mainly affects early visuo-orthographic processing and access to case-independent letter and word identities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Mon, 29 Aug 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001179
- A psychometric analysis of signal detection measures from ratings versus
repeated and nonrepeated forced choices.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: An analysis of the covariance and mean structure of signal detection measures for assessing recognition performance was conducted using data from ratings and repeated k-alternative forced choices (k-AFC). Measures were parameters of the unequal variance signal detection (UVSDT) and dual process signal detection (DPSDT) model and functions thereof, as well as area measures computed from the empirical receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. General sensitivity measures computed from UVSDT model parameters revealed reliabilities of about .70 based on 120 test trials. Doubling the number of test trials did not result in a substantial increase of reliability. Halving the number of test trials reduced the reliabilities to about .60. General sensitivity measures based on estimated parameters of the SDT models were slightly more favorable to measures based on the empirical ROC curve. General sensitivity measures resulting from different tasks exhibited similar reliabilities yet differed in size, with the measures from repeated k-AFC tasks being lower than those from the rating tasks. Considering the first selection of the k-AFC tasks only, assuming equal variance of the old and new familiarity distribution, resulted in sensitivity measures of similar size and reliability as those resulting from the rating tasks. Measures d′ (familiarity-based sensitivity) and ρ (recollection probability) of the DPSDT model revealed reliabilities that were, in general, inacceptable low. This was particularly pronounced for the measures from the k-AFC tasks. The joint analysis of d′ and ρ of the DPSDT model revealed that both measure the same latent construct. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001043
- Contrasting exemplar and prototype models in a natural-science category
domain.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: A classic issue in the cognitive psychology of human category learning has involved the contrast between exemplar and prototype models. However, experimental tests to distinguish the models have relied almost solely on use of artificially-constructed categories composed of simplified stimuli. Here we contrast the predictions from the models in a real-world natural-science category domain—geologic rock types. Previous work in this domain used a set of complementary methods, including multidimensional scaling and direct dimension ratings, to derive a high-dimensional feature space in which the rock stimuli are embedded. The present work compares the category-learning predictions of exemplar and prototype models that make reference to this derived feature space. The experiments include conditions that should be favorable to prototype abstraction, including use of multiple large-size categories, delayed transfer testing, and real-world category structures. Nevertheless, the results of the qualitative and quantitative model comparisons point toward the exemplar model as providing a far better account of the observed results. Evidence is also provided that participants do not rely on all-or-none rote memories for the stored exemplars but rather use remembered exemplars as a basis for generalizing to novel transfer items from the learned categories. Limitations and directions of future work are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 26 May 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001069
- Action memory and metamemory.
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Actions can enhance memory, exemplified by the enactment effect. In a typical experiment, participants hear a series of simple action phrases (e.g., bounce the ball), which they either carry out (subject-performed tasks, or SPTs), watch the experimenter carry out (experimenter-performed tasks, EPTs), or simply listen to (verbal tasks, VTs). Later memory is usually better for SPTs than for either EPTs or VTs. Although research on action memory is extensive, research on action and metamemory is sparse and produces contradictory results. Furthermore, the metamemory literature has largely ignored the effects of action. Some theoretical perspectives argue that actions produce a particularly effective and automatic form of encoding, and that such nonstrategic encoding should produce inaccurate memory predictions. Other theories argue that action memory relies on executive control processes, suggesting that memory predictions for actions should be just as good (or better) than for control conditions. In Experiments 1a and 1b, participants predicted (with judgements-of-learning, JOLs) whether they would later remember SPTs and EPTs. Resolution (the correlation between JOLs and later recall) was greater for EPTs than SPTs, and not significantly different than zero in the latter case. Experiment 3 produced the same results with SPTs and VTs: resolution was greater for VTs and not significant for SPTs. The results are consistent with nonstrategic accounts of the enactment effect, and also highlight the importance of examining metamemory for actions given that actions can alter metamemory relative to verbal (VT) and other nonaction (EPT) conditions. In addition, the presence of JOLs attenuates the enactment effect, a reactive effect of JOLs similar to that found with other encoding effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 12 May 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001136
- Severe publication bias contributes to illusory sleep consolidation in the
motor sequence learning literature.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: We explored the possibility of publication bias in the sleep and explicit motor sequence learning literature by applying precision effect test (PET) and precision effect test with standard errors (PEESE) weighted regression analyses to the 88 effect sizes from a recent comprehensive literature review (Pan & Rickard, 2015). Basic PET analysis indicated pronounced publication bias; that is, the effect sizes were strongly predicted by their standard error. When variables that have previously been shown to both moderate the sleep gain effect and substantially reduce unaccounted for effect size heterogeneity were included in that analysis, evidence for publication bias remained strong. The estimated postsleep gain was negative, suggesting forgetting rather than facilitation, and it was statistically indistinguishable from the estimated postwake gain. In a qualitative review of a smaller group of more recent studies we observed that (a) small sample sizes—a major factor behind the publication bias—are still the norm, (b) use of demonstrably flawed experimental design and analysis remains prevalent, and (c) when authors conclude in favor of sleep-dependent consolidation, they frequently do not cite the articles in which those methodological flaws have been demonstrated. We conclude that there is substantial publication bias, that there is no consolidation-based, absolute performance gain following sleep, and that strong conclusions regarding the hypothesis of less forgetting after sleep than after wakefulness should await further research. Recommendations are made for reducing publication bias in future work. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001090
- Exposure to dialect variation in an artificial language prior to literacy
training impairs reading of words with competing variants but does not
affect decoding skills.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Many bidialectal children grow up speaking a variety (e.g., a regional dialect) that differs from the variety in which they subsequently acquire literacy. Previous computational simulations and artificial literacy learning experiments with adults have demonstrated lower accuracy in reading contrastive words for which dialect variants exist compared with noncontrastive words without dialect variants. At the same time, exposure to multiple varieties did not affect learners’ ability to phonologically decode untrained words; in fact, longer literacy training resulted in a benefit from dialect exposure as competing variants in the input may have increased reliance on grapheme-phoneme conversion. However, these previous experiments interleaved word learning and reading/spelling training, yet children typically acquire substantial oral language knowledge prior to literacy training. Here we used artificial literacy learning with adults to examine whether the previous findings replicate in an ecologically more valid procedure where word learning precedes literacy training. We also manipulated training conditions to explore interventions thought to be beneficial for literacy acquisition, such as providing explicit social cues for variety use and literacy training in both varieties. Our findings replicated the reduced accuracy for reading contrastive words in those learners who had successfully acquired the dialect variants prior to literacy training. This effect was exacerbated when literacy training also included dialect variation. Crucially, although no benefits from the interventions were found, dialect exposure did not affect reading and spelling of untrained words suggesting that phonological decoding skills can remain unaffected by the existence of multiple word form variants in a learner’s lexicon. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001094
- A fundamental asymmetry in human memory: Old ≠ not-new and new
≠ not-old.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: In recognition memory, anything that is objectively new is necessarily not-old, and anything that is objectively old is necessarily not-new. Therefore, judging whether a test item is new is logically equivalent to judging whether it is old, and conversely. Nevertheless, a series of 10 experiments showed that old' and new' judgments did not produce equivalent recognition accuracy. In Experiments 1–4, wherein subjects made old' or new' judgments about test items, new' judgments yielded more accurate performance for old items than old' judgments did, and old' judgments yielded more accurate performance for new items than new' judgments did. This same violation of logical equivalence was observed in Experiments 5–10, wherein subjects made similar' judgments as well as old' and new' ones. In short, old' and new' judgments displayed consistent Judgment × Item crossovers, rather than equivalence. Response latencies were used to test the hypothesis that Judgment × Item crossovers were due to certain judgment-item combinations provoking more deliberate, thorough retrieval than other combinations. There was no support for that hypothesis, but the data were consistent with an earlier theory, which posits that latency depends on the extent to which judgments or items slant retrieval toward accessing verbatim traces. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001101
- The production effect over the long term: Modeling distinctiveness using
serial positions.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: The production effect is a well-established finding: If some words within a list are read aloud, that is, produced, they are better remembered than their silently read neighbors. The effect has been extensively studied with long-term memory tasks. Recently, using immediate serial recall and short-term order reconstruction, Saint-Aubin et al. (2021) reported informative interactions between the production effect and serial positions. Here, we asked whether these interactions would also be observed with the long-term memory tasks used in the field. In Experiment 1, pure and mixed lists of eight words were presented in both order reconstruction and free recall tasks, with a 30-s filled retention interval. In Experiment 2, the list length was extended to 24 words; in Experiment 3, 10-word lists were used with a 2-min retention interval. Results from all experiments aligned well with those observed in short-term memory. With mixed lists, where produced and silently read words alternated, produced items were better recalled, leading to sawtooth serial position curves. With pure lists, produced items were better recalled when studied in the last serial positions, but they were less well recalled for the primacy positions. Results were readily accounted for by the revised feature model, originally developed to explain short-term memory performance. The findings and model suggest that produced items are encoded with more item-specific, modality-related features and that this generates a relative distinctiveness advantage in short- and long-term memory. However, the richer encoding comes at a cost: It appears to disrupt rehearsal. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001093
- Attention, the testing effect, and retrieval-induced forgetting:
Distraction dissociates the positive and negative effects of retrieval on
subsequent memory.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Memory retrieval affects subsequent memory in ways both positive (e.g., the testing effect) and negative (e.g., retrieval-induced forgetting, RIF). The changes to memory that retrieval produces can be thought of as the encoding consequences of retrieval, examined here with respect to attention. In three experiments, participants first studied category–example word pairs, and then practiced retrieval for half the pairs from one-third of the categories (the R + items) and restudied half the pairs from a different third of the categories (the S + items), while the final third of the categories were in the nonpracticed control condition (the Np items). This was followed in turn by a final test over all categories and examples, including the unpracticed examples from the retrieval-practice and restudied categories (the R– and S– items, respectively). The middle phase (of retrieval practice and restudy) was conducted under full attention (FA) or under divided attention (DA) in which participants also performed a distracting secondary task. DA had little effect on final recall in the retrieval practice (R +) condition but significantly reduced final recall of the restudied (S +) items, producing a net increase in the testing effect relative to the FA condition. RIF (measured as the difference between the R– and Np items) was substantial in the FA condition but was eliminated by DA. This occurred because the final recall of R– items significantly increased in the DA compared to FA condition, a highly unusual result in which distraction actually improved an aspect of memory performance. In sum, DA during retrieval practice dissociated the positive and negative effects of retrieval on subsequent memory, increasing the positive effect, embodied by the testing effect, but decreasing the negative effect, embodied by RIF. The theoretical implications are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 28 Oct 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001097
- Stimulus-based mirror effects revisited.
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: The mirror effect is the finding that in recognition tests, a manipulation that increases the hit rate also decreases the false alarm rate. For example, low frequency words have a higher hit rate and a lower false alarm rate than high frequency words. Because the mirror effect is held to be a regularity of memory, it has had a pronounced influence on theories of recognition. We took advantage of the recent increase in the number of linguistic databases to create sets of stimuli that differed on one dimension (contextual diversity, frequency, or concreteness) but were more fully equated on other dimensions known to affect memory. Experiment 1 (contextual diversity), Experiment 3 (frequency), and Experiment 5 (concreteness) found no evidence of a mirror effect. We also conducted parallel experiments which used previously published stimuli that could not avail of the new databases and which therefore contained confounds. Experiment 2 (contextual diversity), Experiment 4 (frequency), and Experiment 6 (concreteness) all resulted in mirror effects. If this pattern of results is replicable, it has broad implications for theories of recognition, which typically view the mirror effect as a benchmark finding. Unfortunately, few articles on the mirror effect include the stimuli, rendering the past literature of little use in testing this hypothesis. We encourage researchers to create and assess other pools of highly controlled stimuli to establish whether the stimulus-based mirror effect obtains when confounds are eliminated or whether it is due to the presence of these confounds. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000901
- Psychological value theory: The psychological value of human lives and
economic goods.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Here, we present a strong test of the hypothesis that sacrificial moral dilemmas are solved using the same value-based decision mechanism that operates on decisions concerning economic goods. To test this hypothesis, we developed Psychological Value Theory. Psychological Value Theory is an expansion and generalization of Cohen and Ahn’s (2016) Theory of Subjective Utilitarianism. Psychological Value Theory defines a new theoretical construct termed Psychological Value, measures Psychological Value using a traditional psychophysics paradigm, and predicts preferential choice from those measurements using a value-based computational model. We evaluate the validity of Psychological Value Theory across six experiments. In Experiment 1, we use Psychological Value Theory to estimate the perceived Psychological Value of human lives and economic goods. The data reveal that perceived Psychological Value of lives is highly influenced by individual differences of people but minimally influenced by the number of people in a group. In Experiments 2–5, we demonstrate that when used as input in a value-based computational model, perceived Psychological Values of human lives accurately predict participants’ RT and response choices to sacrificial moral dilemmas. In Experiment 6, we replicate these findings for decisions involving economic goods. We cross-validate our results with multiple data sets using multiple methods. We conclude that the same value-based processes underlying economic decisions also underlie choices involving human lives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 09 Sep 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001047
- Does vowel harmony affect visual word recognition' Evidence from
Finnish.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: One of the most representative morpho-phonological features of Finnish is the existence of vowel harmony. Back vowels (a, o, and u) and front vowels (ä, ö, and y) cannot appear in the same monomorphemic word (e.g., PÖYTÄ [table] but not POYTÄ)—the vowels e and i are considered “neutral” and can accompany either front or back vowels (e.g., PELÄSTYÄ [get frightened]). Previous research has revealed that native speakers of Finnish use vowel harmony to help segment multilexeme compound words where each lexeme may differ in vowel harmony (e.g., työmaa = työ+maa [workplace]). In Experiments 1 and 2, we examined whether vowel harmony has an effect on the initial moments of monomorphemic word processing using the masked priming technique (lexical decision: Experiment 1; naming: Experiment 2). A target word (e.g., MÄNTY [pine]) could be preceded by a harmonious or disharmonious prime (mänty-MÄNTY vs. manty-MÄNTY; mönty-MÄNTY vs. monty-MÄNTY). As further controls, we also included a comparison with two harmonious conditions differing in the presence of a diacritical letter (mänty-MÄNTY vs. menty-MÄNTY) and a letter similarity comparison with disharmonious primes (manty-MÄNTY vs. monty-MÄNTY). To further examine whether vowel harmony has an effect at later phases of visual word processing, Experiment 3 compared the recognition of harmonious and disharmonious pseudowords in a single-presentation lexical-decision task (e.g., HÖPEÄ vs. HOPEÄ; baseword: HÄPEÄ [shame]). We found slower responses for harmonious than for disharmonious pseudowords. Taken together, these findings reveal that, while Finnish readers are sensitive to vowel harmony, this effect does not occur in the initial stages of processing. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000907
- Exemplar-model account of categorization and recognition when training
instances never repeat.-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: In a novel version of the classic dot-pattern prototype-distortion paradigm of category learning, Homa et al. (2019) tested a condition in which individual training instances never repeated, and observed results that they claimed severely challenged exemplar models of classification and recognition. Among the results was a dissociation in which participants classified transfer items with high accuracy in the no-repeat condition, yet in old-new recognition tests showed no ability to discriminate between old and new items of the same level of distortion from the prototype. In addition, speed of classification learning was no faster in a condition in which a small set of training instances was repeated continuously compared with the no-repeat condition. Here we show through computer-simulation modeling that exemplar models naturally capture the classification-recognition dissociation in the no-repeat condition, as well as a wide variety of other qualitative effects reported by Homa et al. (2019). We also conduct new conceptual-replication experiments to investigate their reported null effect of repeated versus nonrepeated training instances on speed of classification learning. In contrast to Homa et al. (2019) we find that speed of learning is substantially faster in the repeat condition than in the no-repeat condition, precisely as exemplar models predict. The exemplar model also captures a wide variety of transfer effects observed following the completion of category learning, including the classification-recognition dissociation observed across the repeat and no-repeat conditions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0001008
- The attentional boost effect and source memory.
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Stimuli presented with targets during a monitoring task are better remembered than stimuli presented with distractors, a result referred to as the attentional boost effect (ABE). The ABE is consistently found for item memory, but conflicting results have been reported for different assessments of associative memory, with studies of source memory (whether the study item had been presented with a target or distractor) demonstrating an ABE and studies of context memory (memory for the perceptual details or list membership of the study item) not showing the effect. This could be due to methodological differences across studies (study materials: pictures vs. words; number of study presentations: multiple vs. single), issues related to the measurement of source memory (traditional measures vs. multinomial modeling), or differences in the informational bases of source and context memory tests. Three experiments consistently found an ABE in source memory and ruled out differences based on study materials, number of study presentations, and technique for measuring source memory. The discrepancies in the prior research appear to hinge on the differences in informational bases of source and context memory tests. In particular, source memory relies on associations between the study item and information about the monitoring task and is open to inferential processes (participants exhibit a significant bias to categorize false alarms as coming from the distractor condition). (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)
PubDate: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 00:00:00 GMT
DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000990
|
Subscription journal
