Can test list context manipulations improve recognition accuracy in the DRM paradigm?

Gunter, Raymond W.; Ivanko, Stacey L.; Bodner, Glen E.

doi:10.1080/09658210444000458

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For studied themes, although the linear trend was reliable, t (101) = 2.57, p < .05, so was the nonlinear trend, t (101) = 2.24, p <.05; critical word FA rates were higher when stronger or weaker associates were tested than when no associates were tested, t (101) = 3.23, p = .0017 and t (101) = 2.67, p = .0088, respectively, but did not differ as between stronger and weaker tested associates, t < 1. Our results were thus consistent with those Gunter et al (2005) reported, but contradicted key aspects of those Fernandez et al (2001, as discussed in Marsh et al, 2004) reported.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Fernandez, Diez, Alonso, & Beato (2001, as discussed in Marsh et al, 2004) reported that, for studied themes, critical word FAs did not differ regardless of whether five weak associates, five strong associates, or no associates were tested; for unstudied themes, critical word FAs did not differ for weak versus strong tested associates, but were higher in each of those conditions than when no associates were tested. Gunter, Ivanko, and Bodner (2005) found no differences in false alarm rates or remember judgments for critical words when three weak versus three strong studied associates were tested. The results from these two studies thus failed to support a spreading activation account based upon strength of association.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 68%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamics of thematic activation in recognition testing

Kimball

Muntean

Smith

2010

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments investigated the effects of spreading semantic activation during a recognition test. In Experiment 1, activation spreading during testing from words that were thematic associates of unstudied critical words yielded a linear increase in false alarms to such critical words as the number of tested associates increased, regardless of whether the theme appeared during study or whether any thematic processing occurred during study at all. In Experiment 2, the number of tested associates was held constant, and false alarms to critical words from unstudied themes increased linearly with the strength of association between the critical word and its tested associates, consistent with predictions of spreading-activation theory. For studied themes, however, testing weaker or stronger associates yielded similar rates of such false alarms, contrary to spreading-activation theory. These results suggest that test-induced thematic priming is driven by spreading activation for unstudied themes but by thematic reactivation for studied themes.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 68%

Dynamics of thematic activation in recognition testing

Kimball

Muntean

Smith

2010

Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some evidence that supports the gist theory is that (1) false recall and recognition tend to be less affected by retention interval than true recall and recognition, consistent with the idea of a more robust gist trace (e.g., Toglia, Neuschatz, & Goodwin, 1999); (2) including unrelated items on a recognition test enhances false recognition, relative to a test with only associated items, ostensibly by encouraging gist-based responding (e.g., Gunter, Ivanko, & Bodner, 2005); and (3) false recognition occurs for perceptually similar pictures of the same object (e.g., Koutstaal & Schacter, 1997) and even for abstract pictures that are perceptually similar but have no meaning or preexisting semantic associations (e.g., Koutstaal, Schacter, Verfaellie, Brenner, & Jackson, 1999). These last findings do not involve the DRM task, but they do indicate that gist or feature-based processes can cause false recognition in the absence of preexisting associations.…”

Section: Trajectory: What We Know About the Problemmentioning

confidence: 82%

False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews research using the Deese/Roediger-McDermott (DRM) associative memory illusion, whereby people falsely remember words that were not presented. This illusion has broadly influenced basic theories of memory in cognitive psychology and neuroscience and naturally raises the question as to how these theories apply to more complex autobiographical memories. Some applicability is evident from research linking individual differences in the DRM illusion to false autobiographical memories (e.g., misremembering public events) and fantastic autobiographical beliefs (e.g., memories from past lives). But which aspects generalize? Here it is argued that a process-oriented approach is needed in order to answer this question. Many productive years of DRM research indicate that multiple and often opposing psychological processes cause even the most basic false memories. In light of these discoveries, more researchers need to use methods that isolate these component processes if the goal is to understand false memories both in the lab and in life.

show abstract

“…However, this cost was not found in free recall, where initial testing instead benefitted recall on both immediate and delayed tests. Regardless, these ‘costs’ of initial testing are a reminder of the importance of examining how manipulations influence both false and correct memory in false memory paradigms (e.g., Gunter, Ivanko, & Bodner, 2005; Huff et al, 2015). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing the Misinformation Effect Through Initial Testing: Take Two Tests and Recall Me in the Morning?

Huff

Weinsheimer

Bodner

2015

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryInitial retrieval of an event can reduce people's susceptibility to misinformation. We explored whether protective effects of initial testing could be obtained on final free recall and source‐monitoring tests. After studying six household scenes (e.g., a bathroom), participants attempted to recall items from the scenes zero, one, or two times. Immediately or after a 48‐hour delay, non‐presented items (e.g., soap and toothbrush) were exposed zero, one, or four times through a social contagion manipulation in which participants reviewed sets of recall tests ostensibly provided by other participants. A protective effect of testing emerged on a final free recall test following the delay and on a final source‐memory test regardless of delay. Taking two initial tests did not increase these protective effects. Determining whether initial testing will have protective (versus harmful) effects on memory has important practical implications for interviewing eyewitnesses. © 2015 The Authors. Applied Cognitive Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Can test list context manipulations improve recognition accuracy in the DRM paradigm?

Cited by 12 publications

References 53 publications

Dynamics of thematic activation in recognition testing

Dynamics of thematic activation in recognition testing

False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion

Reducing the Misinformation Effect Through Initial Testing: Take Two Tests and Recall Me in the Morning?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About