Context effects in word identification and episodic recognition: A single dissociation

Abstract

Two experiments were conducted to evaluate the role of context in word identification and episodic recognition. Each experiment involved a study phase and a test phase. During the study phase, subjects were presented with a mixture of scrambled, semantically anomalous, and semantically integrated sentences. During the test phase, subjects were presented with individual printed words and were required to answer either an episodic-recognition test (Experiment 1) or a wordidentification test (Experiment 2). The results of the word-identification experiment showed that repetition printing, although present under each condition, was insensitive to the contextual manipulation. Performance under episodic-recognition conditions, however, was sensitive to contextual variation; the actual scores ranged from 43% correct for words presented in scrambled sentences to 60% correct for words presented in semantically integrated sentences. The results constitute a single dissociation, and they are consistent with the proposition that performance in episodic recognition is sensitive to a form of information that (1) does not influence word identification, and (2) is influenced by variation in contextual factors during encoding.An important and contentious issue in recent research concerns the extent to which performance in wordidentification and episodic-recognition tasks can be explained by reference to a common memory system. In operational terms, the tasks are quite distinct. Subjects in word-identification tasks are typically presented with a degraded stimulus and instructed to name it. They are not required to judge whether or not the stimulus is old or new with reference to an earlier study session, and memory is therefore tested implicitly rather than explicitly. Subjects in episodic-recognition tasks, by contrast, are given an explicit memory test in which they are instructed to indicate whether or not each test word was present in an earlier study session.The issue is important because evidence that performance in each task is mediated by a common system provides a formal link between perception and memory. According to Jacoby and Brooks (1984), for example, there is no clear distinction between the processes involved in perceptual identification and episodic recognition. They claimed that performance in each task depends on access to information about earlier occurrences of the same stimulus or similar stimuli. There is provision in their account for task-specific effects-where this involves dependence on different types of information-but their basic premise is clear. Performance in each case follows access to memory about specific instances or episodes. The alternative account, that word identification and episodic recognition involve different systems, is widely reflected in the literature, if only in the sense that a wide range

The influence of context on recognition memory in monkeys: Effects of hippocampal, parahippocampal and perirhinal lesions

“…This finding is consistent with the decrease in memory performance found in control human subjects when tested with a variety of tasks and under different types of context manipulations (Canas and Nelson, 1986; Cann and Ross, 1989; Dalton, 1993; Emmerson 1986; Geiselman and Bjork, 1980; Hollingworth, 2006; Light and Carter-Sobel, 1970; Park et al, 1984, 1987; Reder et al, 1974; Russo et al, 1999; Smith, 1985; Smith and Vela, 1986; Stumpfel and Kirsner, 1986; Tulving and Thompson, 1973;). Furthermore, the results parallel those reported in animal studies (Dellu et al, 1997; Dix and Aggleton, 1999; Mumby et al, 2002; O'Brien et al, 2006) that have used incidental recognition memory tasks similar to the VPC-context task used in the present study.…”

“…It can be as simple as the color of text on a word list, or as complex as the physical environment in which learning took place. Several studies in humans have demonstrated a decreased memory performance when context is changed between encoding and retrieval after changing semantic (Light and Carter-Sobel, 1970; Reder et al, 1974; Stumpfel and Kirsner, 1986; Tulving and Thompson, 1973), cue specific (Dalton, 1993; Hollingworth, 2006; Park et al, 1984, 1987; Russo et al, 1999; Smith and Vela, 1986), olfactory (Cann and Ross, 1989), auditory (Geiselman and Bjork, 1980) or environmental (Canas and Nelson, 1986; Emmerson, 1986; Smith, 1985; Smith and Vela, 1986) contexts. Further, both rodent (Dellu et al, 1997; Dix and Aggleton, 1999) and primate (Pascalis et al, 2009) studies have shown that, although animals are able to recognize objects in a changed background context, recognition memory was stronger when the familiar context was used in the retrieval phase.…”

Stratégies d'encodage et performances au rappel d'une figure complexe par des sujets âgés normaux

“…Ce contexte est encode avec les informations et sert d'indice pour les recouvrer (Tulving, 1985). De plus, les variations contextuelles ont une influence sur la memorisation des informations (Stumpfel et Kirsner, 1986). Selon cette classification, la memoire la plus affectee lors du vieillissement semble bien-etre la memoire episodique (Smith et Fullerton, 1981).…”