Decomposing the memory processes contributing to enactment effects by multinomial modelling

Steffens, Melanie C.; Jelenec, Petra; Mecklenbräuker, Silvia

doi:10.1080/09541440701868668

Cited by 34 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is therefore reasonable that using either of these two information processes in free recall can lead to comparable results for SPTs and EPTs, as was observed in the present study. This is also similar to the findings of Steffens (2007) and Steffens et al (2006Steffens et al ( /2009. In recognition tests, itemspecific information is sufficient to recognize the retrieval cues (Steffen et al, 2009).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

“…It has been suggested that acting phrases (performing and observing the action) provoke different types and levels of cognitive and motivational processing (Knopf, et al, 2005). In SPTs, individuals are led to concentrate on each action phrase; hence, there is an increased distinctiveness in item learning and more detailed item-specific information (Steffens et al, 2006;Steffens et al, 2009;von Essen, 2005). By contrast, the level of organization and relational processing is superior in EPTs relative to SPTs (Golly-Haring & Engelkamp, 2003;Steffen, 2007).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Subject-perform tasks (SPTs) increase planning and executing actions, and participants are instructed on what to do and forced to focus on each item and event (Engelkamp, 1998). SPTs improve item-specific information processing and distinctiveness more than verbal encoding tasks (VTs) (Engelkamp & Dehn, 2000;Steffens, Jelenec & Mecklenbräuker, 2009;Steffens, Jelenec, Mecklenbräuker, & Thompson, 2006;von Essen, 2005). In contrast, relational information, which refers to classification and association among classes of items or events, is not improved in SPTs (Engelkamp & Zimmer, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Developmental differences in episodic memory across school ages: evidence from enacted events performed by self and others

Badinlou

Kormi-Nouri

Nasab

et al. 2015

Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developmental differences in episodic memory across school ages: Evidence from enacted events performed by self and others. The aim of this study was to examine action memory as a form of episodic memory among school-aged subjects. Most research on action memory has focused on memory changes in adult populations. This study explored the action memory of children over time. A total of 410 schoolaged child participants, comprising 201 girls and 208 boys in four age groups (8, 10, 12, and 14), were included in this study. We studied two forms of action encoding, subject-performed tasks (SPTs) and experimenter-performed tasks (EPTs), which were compared with one verbal encoding task (VT) as a control condition. At retrieval, we used three memory tests (free recall, cued recall, and recognition). We observed significant differences in memory performance in children aged 8 to 14 years with respect to free recall and cued recall but not recognition. The largest memory enhancement was observed for the SPTs in the 8-to 14-year-old participants under all test conditions. Participants performed equally well on the free recall of SPTs and EPTs, whereas they displayed better performances on the cued recall and recognition of SPTs compared to EPTs. The strategic nature of SPTs and the distinction between item-specific information and relational information are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developmental differences in episodic memory across school ages: evidence from enacted events performed by self and others

Badinlou

Kormi-Nouri

Nasab

et al. 2015

Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Multinomial processing tree (MPT) models (Batchelder & Riefer, 1999;Erdfelder et al, 2009) offer such an analysis by providing separate estimates of the cognitive processes underlying performance scores. In the past, MPT models have been used successfully to disentangle storage and retrieval contributions to well-known memory phenomena, for example, the bizarreness effect (Riefer & Rouder, 1992), the recognition failure effect (Riefer & Batchelder, 1995), retroactive inhibition (Bä uml, 1991(Bä uml, , 1996, and more recently the enactment effect (Steffens, Jelenec, & Mecklenbrä uker, 2009;Steffens, Jelenec, Mecklenbrä uker, & Thompson, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Encoding, maintenance, and retrieval processes in the lag effect: A multinomial processing tree analysis

Küpper-Tetzel

Erdfelder

2012

Memory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Short-term studies on repeated learning of verbatim material have typically revealed an overall benefit of long lags compared to short lags between repetitions. This has been referred to as the lag effect. On educationally relevant time scales, however, an inverted-U-shaped relation between lag and memory performance is often observed. Recently, Cepeda et al. (2009) showed that the optimal lag for relearning depends heavily on the time interval between the last learning session and the final memory test (i.e., the retention interval; RI). In order to explore the cognitive mechanisms underlying this result in more detail we independently manipulated both the lag and the RI in a 3×2 experimental design and analysed our data using a multinomial processing tree model for free-then-cued-recall data. Our results reveal that the lag effect trends are mainly driven by encoding and maintenance processes rather than by retrieval mechanisms. Our findings have important implications for theories of the lag effect.

show abstract

“… In action‐memory research, the whole action (i.e., verb–noun) phrase is often considered as an item. Therefore, verb–noun relational processing has been referred to as (within‐) item‐integration , and is considered as a type of item‐specific processing in addition to the individual processing of verb and noun (Kormi‐Nouri & Nilsson, ; Kubik et al ., ; Steffens et al ., ). …”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Effects of testing on subsequent re‐encoding and long‐term forgetting of action‐relevant materials: On the influence of recall type

Kubik

Nilsson

Olofsson

et al. 2015

Scandinavian J Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Testing one's memory of previously studied information reduces the rate of forgetting, compared to restudy. However, little is known about how this direct testing effect applies to action phrases (e.g., "wash the car") - a learning material relevant to everyday memory. As action phrases consist of two different components, a verb (e.g., "wash") and a noun (e.g., "car"), testing can either be implemented as noun-cued recall of verbs or verb-cued recall of nouns, which may differently affect later memory performance. In the present study, we investigated the effect of testing for these two recall types, using verbally encoded action phrases as learning materials. Results showed that repeated study-test practice, compared to repeated study-restudy practice, decreased the forgetting rate across 1 week to a similar degree for both noun-cued and verb-cued recall types. However, noun-cued recall of verbs initiated more new subsequent learning during the first restudy, compared to verb-cued recall of nouns. The study provides evidence that testing has benefits on both subsequent restudy and long-term retention of action-relevant materials, but that these benefits are differently expressed with testing via noun-cued versus verb-cued recall.

show abstract

Decomposing the memory processes contributing to enactment effects by multinomial modelling

Cited by 34 publications

References 55 publications

Developmental differences in episodic memory across school ages: evidence from enacted events performed by self and others

Developmental differences in episodic memory across school ages: evidence from enacted events performed by self and others

Encoding, maintenance, and retrieval processes in the lag effect: A multinomial processing tree analysis

Effects of testing on subsequent re‐encoding and long‐term forgetting of action‐relevant materials: On the influence of recall type

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About