PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 16393040

List discrimination in associative recognition and implications for representation.

Abstract

Four experiments tested the predictions made by the model outlined in A. H. Criss and R. M. Shiffrin (2004b). Participants studied 2 successive lists of pairs followed by a recognition memory test for the most recent list. Some items and some pairs were repeated across the 2 lists. Critically, a given item could be repeated in the same or different type of pair. For associative recognition, performance was only affected by repetitions in the same pair type. However, in single-item recognition confusions occurred for both types of repetitions. The results are as predicted and confirm the assumption that different associative representations were stored even when the same token repeated in different pair types, whereas similar item representations were used regardless of pair type.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Amy H Criss, Richard M Shiffrin. 2005. List discrimination in associative recognition and implications for representation.. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1199

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Representing word meaning and order information in a composite holographic lexicon.

The authors present a computational model that builds a holographic lexicon representing both word meaning and word order from unsupervised experience with natural language. The model uses simple convolution and superposition mechanisms (cf. B. B. Murdock, 1982) to learn distributed holographic representations for words. The structure of the resulting lexicon can account for empirical data from classic experiments studying semantic typicality, categorization, priming, and semantic constraint in sentence completions. Furthermore, order information can be retrieved from the holographic representations, allowing the model to account for limited word transitions without the need for built-in transition rules. The model demonstrates that a broad range of psychological data can be accounted for directly from the structure of lexical representations learned in this way, without the need for complexity to be built into either the processing mechanisms or the representations. The holographic representations are an appropriate knowledge representation to be used by higher order models of language comprehension, relieving the complexity required at the higher level.

Association↗

Separating bias and sensitivity in judgments of associative memory.

Ratings of the degree of association between words are linearly related to normed associative strengths, but the intercept is high, and the slope is shallow (the judgments of associative memory [JAM] function). Two experiments included manipulations intended to decrease the intercept and increase the slope. Discrimination training on many pairs of words and constraining ratings to sum to a constant both reduced the intercept but failed to change the slope. The intercept of the JAM function appears to contain a bias component that can be manipulated independently of the slope, which reflects sensitivity to associative strengths.

Association↗

Transfer of noncorresponding spatial associations to the auditory Simon task.

Four experiments examined transfer of noncorresponding spatial stimulus-response associations to an auditory Simon task for which stimulus location was irrelevant. Experiment 1 established that, for a horizontal auditory Simon task, transfer of spatial associations occurs after 300 trials of practice with an incompatible mapping of auditory stimuli to keypress responses. Experiments 2-4 examined transfer effects within the auditory modality when the stimuli and responses were varied along vertical and horizontal dimensions. Transfer occurred when the stimuli and responses were arrayed along the same dimension in practice and transfer but not when they were arrayed along orthogonal dimensions. These findings indicate that prior task-defined associations have less influence on the auditory Simon effect than on the visual Simon effect, possibly because of the stronger tendency for an auditory stimulus to activate its corresponding response.

Association↗