False recognition of nonpresented words that were strong associates of 12 words in a study list was examined. Six lists were read to subjects; each list contained the 12strongest associates to a critical nonpresented word. False-alarm rates to the 6 critical nonpresented words were obtained under several different conditions. The manipulations included varying the level of processing done to the study lists, varying the recognition-test procedure, repeating each of the study lists three times, and mixing the words from the six study lists together. A reliable false-recognition effect for critical nonpresented words was obtained in all conditions. However, the effect was not impervious to all of the manipulations. Significantly lower false recognition was obtained when learning was incidental as well as when the words on the six lists were mixed together. Neither level of processing nor repetition significantly influenced false recognition. This last result is inconsistent with Hintzman's (1988) MINERVA 2 global memory model, but agrees with predictions from Shiffrin, Ratcliff, and Clark's (1990) SAM model. The study ofrecognition memory over the last 10 years has been heavily influenced by a class of models known as global matching models (see, e.g., Gillund & Shiffrin, 1984;Hintzman, 1988;Murdock, 1982). These models posit that recognition of a test item is based on an index of familiarity computed for the item. This familiarity value is calculated by comparing the test item in a parallel fashion with all items in memory. A test item that is similar to several items in memory will have a high familiarity value and most likely will be called "old" on a recognition test. Clark and Gronlund (1996) noted that support for this type of model has come from studies examining false-alarm rates to certain types of non studied items. These studies have demonstrated that false alarms reliably occur to test items semantically similar to studied items. Subjects are much more likely to call a new item "old" if that item is related in meaning to several words on the study list. The false-alarm rate generally increases as a function of the number of list items that are semantically related to a distractor (Hintzman, 1988;Shiffrin, Huber, & Marinelli, 1995). This finding has been referred to as the global similarity effect.The global similarity effect can easily be explained in terms of the global matching models. If memory for a given test item is determined by comparing that item to all studied items in memory, then false alarms should occur for test items that are similar to many items on the study list. Furthermore, as the number ofstudy items simThis research was conducted while A.AT was supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Mental Retardation Research Training Grant 5-T32-HD07176-16. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to A. A. Tussing, Department of Psychology, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, ilar to a test item increases, false al...

No abstract

No abstract

Theories of recognition memory based on signal detection theory posit that a recognition decision is similar to a psychophysical judgment. Like a judgment of stimulus brightness or loudness, a recognition judgment is based on the value of a unidimensional signal computed for the test item. This signal has been called the strength or familiarity value. One prediction of these models is that the ability to discriminate between a studied and nonstudied test item depends on the ability to detect the difference in their familiarities. This ability in turn is influenced by the items' familiarity levels; discrimination should become more difficult as the familiarity of both items increases. This prediction was supported in 3 experiments using a forced-choice procedure. Also, accuracy was higher when the list contained repeated items rather than a comparable number of distinct items.

No abstract

No abstract