A test of confusion theory of encoding specificity

Wiseman, Sandor; Tulving, Endel

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(75)80016-8

Cited by 55 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The paradigmatic example is the well-known encoding specificity effect, in which studying and testing in a single context yields superior remembering compared to studying and testing in different contexts (Godden & Baddely, 1975;S. M. Smith, 1979;Tulving & Thomson, 1973;Wiseman & Tulving, 1975). This effect is consistent with the view that remembering is relatively strong in contexts in which it has served a purpose.…”

Section: Comparing the Carin Theory To Models Of Associative Learningsupporting

confidence: 55%

The Competition‐among‐relations‐in‐nominals Theory of Conceptual Combination: Implications for Stimulus Class Formation and Class Expansion

Gagné

2002

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One way in which new concepts are added to the conceptual system is through conceptual combination. The competition-among-relations-in-nominals (CARIN) theory (Gagné & Shoben, 1997) proposes that conceptual combination involves specifying a thematic relation (e.g., noun MADE OF modifier) to link the constituent concepts (e.g., chocolate and bee). This theory claims that relations have different strengths for various concepts that correspond to how often a modifier and relation have been paired in previous encounters with combined concepts and that this relational knowledge strongly affects the ease with which combined concepts can be formed. A mathematical model that incorporates key claims of the theory is presented, and empirical findings that are relevant to evaluating the CARIN theory are reviewed. The parallels between the CARIN theory and approaches to stimulus class formation are also discussed.

show abstract

Section: Comparing the Carin Theory To Models Of Associative Learningsupporting

confidence: 55%

The Competition‐among‐relations‐in‐nominals Theory of Conceptual Combination: Implications for Stimulus Class Formation and Class Expansion

Gagné

2002

J Exper Analysis Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recognition failure was revealed in that targets not recognized during the generate-recognize phase of the experiment were often recalled later in the presence of reinstated weak cues. This basic finding has been replicated many times (e.g., Bartling & Thompson, 1977;Gardiner, 1988;Postman, 1975;Reder, Anderson, & Bjork, 1974;Sikstrom & Gardiner, 1997;Tulving, 1974;Watkins & Tulving, 1975;Wiseman & Tulving, 1975; see Nilsson & Gardiner, 1993 for a review) and forms the basis of the Tulving-Wiseman law. Recognition failure is problematic for generate-recognize theory because recall is limited by two bottlenecks, whereas recognition is only limited by one (i.e., the target item has already been ''generated'' in recognition).…”

mentioning

confidence: 74%

Generation failure: Estimating metacognition in cued recall

Higham¹,

Tam²

2005

Journal of Memory and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Tulving and Thomson (1973) were the first researchers to utilize the procedure, and they termed the result "recognition failure of recallable words" (p. 39). Since that study, the results and the implications of the results have been a topic of much debate and experimentation (e.g., Antognini, 1975;Rabinowitz, Mandler, & Barsalou, 1977;Reder et al, 1974;Salzberg, 1976;Wiseman & Tulving, 1975).…”

Section: Match Between Encodings At Study and Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.

Gillund¹,

Shiffrin²

1984

Psychological Review

1,518

1,605

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Search of Associative Memory (SAM) model for recall (Raaijmakers & Shiffrin, 1981b) is extended by assuming that a familiarity process is used for recognition. The recall model posits cue-dependent probabilistic sampling and recovery from an associative network. Our recognition model is closely related to the recall model because the total episodic activation due to the context and item cues is used in recall as a basis for sampling and in recognition to make a decision. The model, formalized in a computer simulation program, correctly predicts a number of findings in the literature as well as the results from a new experiment on the wordfrequency effect."A critical problem of long standing in psychological study of memory is concerned with the relation between recall and recognition. In what sense are they the same, and in what sense are they different?" (Tulving & Watkins, 1973, p. 739).This article is a preliminary attempt to formulate a theory that describes in detail the relationship between recall and recognition. The relationship is realized in a computer simulation model, and the model's predictions are checked against existing data as well as data generated in our laboratory. The model for recognition is related mathematically and logically to the Search of Associative Memory (SAM) theory of memory retrieval that has

show abstract

A test of confusion theory of encoding specificity

Cited by 55 publications

References 20 publications

The Competition‐among‐relations‐in‐nominals Theory of Conceptual Combination: Implications for Stimulus Class Formation and Class Expansion

The Competition‐among‐relations‐in‐nominals Theory of Conceptual Combination: Implications for Stimulus Class Formation and Class Expansion

Generation failure: Estimating metacognition in cued recall

A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About