Cohesion Failure as a Source of Memory Illusions

Kroll, Neal E. A.; Knight, Robert T.; Metcalfe, Janet; Wolf, Elizabeth S.; Tulving, Endel

doi:10.1006/jmla.1996.0010

Cited by 180 publications

(267 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

245

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The impairment extended across all trial types with no evidence that hippocampal damage selectively (or disproportionately) impaired the associative or conjunctive component of memory. We discuss our findings in the light of the work by Kroll et al (1996) and other recent neuropsychological, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging studies of hippocampal function and single-item and associative memory. …”

mentioning

confidence: 60%

“…We present data from five experiments designed to examine this finding in more detail. In each experiment, five patients with bilateral hippocampal damage and eight controls were tested using the same protocol as Kroll et al (1996). On each trial, a two-component stimulus was presented.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stimuli could be entirely novel, novel with one previously encountered (repeated) component, novel but with both components repeated, or a true repetition. The first experiment was a direct replication using the same disyllabic words as Kroll et al (1996). The second experiment used pseudo-words, constructed of two monosyllabic words (e.g., jambark).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Hippocampal damage equally impairs memory for single items and memory for conjunctions

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a prior study of continuous recognition performance, data were reported in support of the hypothesis that the hippocampus is not needed to remember the individual components of a stimulus but is important for remembering associations between its components (Kroll et al. 1996. J Mem Lang 35:176-196). Patients with left hippocampal damage were able to endorse recently encountered words and to reject novel words, as well as disyllabic words in which one of the syllables had been previously encountered. However, they failed to reject words in which both syllables had been encountered independently in different words. We present data from five experiments designed to examine this finding in more detail. In each experiment, five patients with bilateral hippocampal damage and eight controls were tested using the same protocol as Kroll et al. (1996). On each trial, a two-component stimulus was presented. Stimuli could be entirely novel, novel with one previously encountered (repeated) component, novel but with both components repeated, or a true repetition. The first experiment was a direct replication using the same disyllabic words as Kroll et al. (1996). The second experiment used pseudo-words, constructed of two monosyllabic words (e.g., jambark). The third experiment used the same pairs of monosyllabic words, but presented separately on the screen to encourage participants to treat each component independently. The fourth experiment used pairs of objects, and the fifth experiment used face-house pairs. In all five experiments, patients with hippocampal damage exhibited impaired recognition memory. The impairment extended across all trial types with no evidence that hippocampal damage selectively (or disproportionately) impaired the associative or conjunctive component of memory. We discuss our findings in the light of the work by Kroll et al. (1996) and other recent neuropsychological, electrophysiological, and neuroimaging studies of hippocampal function and single-item and associative memory.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hippocampal damage equally impairs memory for single items and memory for conjunctions

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, successful discrimination between old and conjunction stimuli cannot be based on memory for individual stimulus elements, but must be based on memory for the associations formed between individual elements at study. The results from these studies demonstrate that amnesic patients are disproportionately impaired at rejecting conjunction stimuli (Kroll, Knight, Metcalfe, Wolf, & Tulving, 1996;Reinitz, Verfaellie, & Milberg, 1996; but see Stark & Squire, 2003). Although these findings provide support for the notion that amnesia reflects an impairment of memory for associative information, the results do not provide direct evidence of a differential deficit in memory for complex associations (as opposed to simple associations), because no measure of memory for simple associations (i.e., the individual elements of which the stimuli were composed) was obtained.…”

mentioning

confidence: 77%

Disproportionate deficit in associative recognition relative to item recognition in global amnesia

Giovanello

Verfaellie

Keane

2003

Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two experiments, we tested the hypothesis that medial temporal lobe (MTL) amnesic patients and, likewise, diencephalic (DNC) amnesic patients evidence a disproportionate deficit in memory for associations in comparison with memory for single items. In Experiment 1, we equated item recognition in amnesic and control participants and found that, under these conditions, associative recognition remained impaired both for MTL patients and for DNC patients. To rule out an alternative interpretation of the results of Experiment 1, in Experiment 2 we compared the performance of amnesic and control participants on a one-item recognition task and a two-item recognition task that required no memory for the association between members of word pairs. In the MTL group, when single-item recognition was equated to that of the controls, two-item nonassociative pair memory was equivalent as well. In the DNC group, nonassociative pair memory was impaired, but this impairment did not fully account for the impairment in associative memory. These findings indicate that memory for novel associations between items is disproportionately impaired in comparison with memory for single items in amnesia.

show abstract

“…In contrast, declarative memory can be viewed as the way in which one models the complexities of the world (Clark & Squire, 1998). Declarative memory is highly organized and represents broad associative relationships, both probabilistic and conditional,among multiple contingencies (Cohen & Eichenbaum, 1993;Hebb, 1949;Kroll, Knight, Metcalfe, Wolf, & Tulving, 1996). For example, word list recall is vastly improved if it is associatively organized (Anderson, 1981;Bower, Clark, Lesgold, & Winzenz, 1969), and well-learned arrays of objects are learned in associative hierarchies (McNamara, Hardy, & Hirtle, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relational learning with and without awareness: Transitive inference using nonverbal stimuli in humans

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cohesion Failure as a Source of Memory Illusions

Cited by 180 publications

References 11 publications

Hippocampal damage equally impairs memory for single items and memory for conjunctions

Hippocampal damage equally impairs memory for single items and memory for conjunctions

Disproportionate deficit in associative recognition relative to item recognition in global amnesia

Relational learning with and without awareness: Transitive inference using nonverbal stimuli in humans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About