Effects of adult aging on utilization of temporal and semantic associations during free and serial recall

Abstract

Older adults show poorer performance than young adults at word list recall, especially for order information. In contrast with this temporal association deficit, older adults are generally adept at using preexisting semantic associations, when present, to aid recall. We compared the use of temporal and semantic associations in young and older adults' word list recall following both free recall and serial recall instructions. Decomposition of serial position curves confirmed that older adults showed weakened use of temporal context in recall in relation to young adults, a difference that was amplified in serial recall. Older adults' temporal associations were also less effective than young adults' when correlated with serial recall performance. The differential age decrement for serial versus free recall was accompanied by a persistent influence of latent semantic associations in the older adults, even when maladaptive for serial recall.

Sequential dependencies in recall of sequences: Filling in the blanks

“…Figures 5 and 6 show the results of this analysis, focusing on the pattern following the first order error for the condition in which list length was known by participants prior to presentation. The results for longer list lengths are similar to those obtained by Solway et al (2012) in their analysis of the data of Golomb, Peelle, Addis, Kahana, and Wingfield (2008): The displacement function tends to be weighted toward negative displacements (Fig. 5), and the Table 1 for the source of the data illustrated in each panel lag-CRP function shows a clear tendency to produce +1 transitions (Fig.…”

Examining the relationship between free recall and immediate serial recall: Similar patterns of rehearsal and similar effects of word length, presentation rate, and articulatory suppression

“…Critically, there was little difference between the data from the precued conditions and the data from the postcued conditions on the two tasks. Furthermore, although the participants tended to start their recall from different serial positions in the two tasks, the degree to which there was a tendency to output in a forward order was nevertheless strikingly similar (for similar findings with slightly longer lists, see also Golomb, Peelle, Addis, Kahana, & Wingfield, 2008). We argued that these data could be most economically explained by assuming that both tasks were underpinned by the same memory mechanisms, which were characterized by recency and forwardordered recall.…”

“…We anticipated that the participants would have difficulty in performing ISR with 12-item lists, and so we adopted the task instructions for ISR used recently by Golomb et al (2008), who tested ISR with 10-item lists. These instructions explicitly encouraged participants to begin recall with the very first list item, but if this was not possible, they were instructed to begin recall with the earliest item that they could remember.…”

Examining the relationship between free recall and immediate serial recall: The effects of list length and output order.

“…Half the participants were instructed using the ISR-free instructions, and the other half were instructed using more standard ISR instructions. Specifically, we adopted the instructions used by Golomb, Peelle, Addis, Kahana, and Wingfield (2008) who examined serial recall of 10-word lists. Golomb et al encouraged participants to begin recall with the first list item; however, because of the supraspan list length, they instructed participants that if they were unable to retrieve the first item, they should begin their recall with the earliest item that they could remember.…”