Contextual variability and serial position effects in free recall.

Abstract

In-immediate free recall, words recalled successively tend to come from nearby serial positions. M. J. Kahana (1996) documented this effect and showed that this tendency, which the authors refer to as the lag recency effect, is well described by a variant of the search of associative memory (SAM) model (J. G. W. Raaijmakers & R. M. Shiffrin, 1980, 1981). In 2 experiments, participants performed immediate, delayed, and continuous distractor free recall under conditions designed to minimize rehearsal. The lag recency effect, previously observed in immediate free recall, was also observed in delayed and continuous distractor free recall. Although two-store memory models, such as SAM, readily account for the end-of-list recency effect in immediate free recall, and its attenuation in delayed free recall, these models fail to account for the long-term recency effect. By means of analytic simulations, the authors show that both the end of list recency effect and the lag recency effect, across all distractor conditions, can be explained by a single-store model in which context, retrieved with each recalled item, serves as a cue for subsequent recalls.

The Temporal Context Model in Spatial Navigation and Relational Learning: Toward a Common Explanation of Medial Temporal Lobe Function Across Domains.

“…The last column in Table 2 gives the probability that the first item re-called with t T as a cue will be A, B or C. These values add up to one, which is consistent with the definition of the probability of first recall (Laming, 1999;Howard & Kahana, 1999). It is important to note that while TCM has been applied extensively to free recall, it does not contain any of the sampling and recovery rules that would be necessary to produce a complete description of the task (such as those specified by SAM Raaijmakers & Shiffrin, 1980,1981.…”

“…Model results are from Howard and Kahana (2002a). The experimental data is taken from Howard and Kahana (1999). a.…”

“…Two components describe episodic association-TCM describes asymmetric associations between stimuli in episodic recall (Howard & Kahana, 1999;Kahana, 1996;Kahana & Caplan, 2002) Because each state of context in a list of non-repeated items is as similar to its predecessor as it is to the states that follow, t A i provides a symmetric retrieval cue that favors nearby list items in both the forward and backward directions (see Eq. 8).…”

“…Both of these properties have been observed in immediate (Howard & Kahana, 1999;Kahana, 1996;Ward et al, 2003), delayed (Howard & Kahana, 1999; and continuous-distractor free recall (Howard & Kahana, 1999), as well as serial recall (Kahana & Caplan, 2002;Raskin & Cook, 1937).…”

“…Because t i is the functional cue for recall, and t i is an effective cue for recall of item j to the extent that t i overlaps with t j , the property that t i decays gradually naturally provides a basis for the the principle of recency (Howard & Kahana, 2002a), which is observed in all of the major episodic memory paradigms (Howard & Kahana, 1999;Murdock, 1962Murdock, , 1963bNeath, 1993;Ratcliff & Murdock, 1976). Appendix A illustrates this principle with a worked example that demonstrates the recency effect.…”