General psychology in terms of behavior.

Smith, Stevenson; Guthrie, Edwin R.

doi:10.1037/13990-000

Cited by 54 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Their data show quite clearly that only when recollection is tested in the absence of discretely identifiable list or copy cues are substantial contextdependent effects likely to be in evidence (cf. Abernethy, 1940;Smith & Guthrie, 1921). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The cue-dependent nature of state-dependent retrieval

1980

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An enduring problem in the study of human state-dependent retrieval concerns the apparent unpredictability of the phenomenon. Although many investigators have observed that utilization of information in episodic memory critically depends for its success on restoration, at the time of attempted retrieval, of the pharmacological state in which the information was originally acquired, many others have been unable to find evidence of such state-dependent effects. Indeed, negative results are so common that human state dependence has come to be popularly regarded as an untrustworthy phenomenon of little practical or theoretical significance. The message of this article is that the unpredictability of state-dependent effects in man is more apparent than real. Evidence is presented to the effect that, with very few exceptions, failures to demonstrate state dependence are restricted to situations in which utilization of stored information is tested in the presence of discretely identifiable retrieval cues, and successes, to situations in which retrieval occurs in the absence of any observable reminders. It is also shown that when the conditions of retrieval, with respect to the presence or absence of explicit cues, remain constant, the probability of demonstrating state dependence also remains constant across a relatively broad spectrum of experimental conditions. Speculations about the nature of the cognitive mechanisms underlying the so-called "cuing effect" in human state dependence are offered, and promising new directions for research are outlined.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The cue-dependent nature of state-dependent retrieval

1980

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subdividing a list of words and presenting them in multiple environments in Experiment 1 enhanced memory for subjects tested in a new room. Testing in a new environment has been shown to produce worse recall than testing in the context in which learning occurred, presumably because the learning context serves as a recall cue (S. Smith & Guthrie, 1924;S. M. Smith, 1979).…”

Section: Test Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhancement of recall using multiple environmental contexts during learning

Smith

1982

Memory & Cognition

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distributing the presentation of sublists of words into multiple learning rooms produced better free recall scores than a single learning room condition for subjects who were given a comprehensive recall test in a new environment. No such effects occurred on recognition or list differentiation tests in Experiment 2, implying a retrieval explanation rather than one relying upon learning or list differentiation effects. Experiment 3 found that the contextual dependence of recall (i.e., recall tested in a learning context is better than recall tested in a new context) was nullified by using multiple learning rooms, rather than a single room for input. The data are consistent with an explanation that states that the multiple learning rooms become associated with the different sublists during learning and subsequently act as memory landmarks that guide the course of retrieval.

show abstract

“…The memory trace of an event also inc1udes contextual components representing the physical environment in which the event is perceived (Abemethy, 1940;S. Smith & Guthrie, 1924).…”

Section: Contextual Componentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition

1979

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spacing repetitions generally facilitates memory for the repeated events. This article describes a theory of spacing effects that uses the same principles to account for both facilitatory and inhibitory effects of spacing in a number of memory paradigms. Increasing the spacing between repetitions is assumed to result in the storage of greater amounts of information of three types or levels: contextual, structural (associative), and descriptive. Contextual information is encoded automatically, while the encoding of the structural and descriptive information depends on control processes utilized. Remembering involves accessing the stored information using retrieval cues containing information on any level that matches the stored information. The ultimate effectiveness of the spacing is controlled by this matehing between the retrieval cues and the stored information. Previous experiments demonstrating the operation of these principles on the structural and descriptive levels are reviewed. Three new experiments are reported that illustrate interactions between stored information and retrieval cues based on contextual information.The effect of arepetition has always been of great importance to all theories of learning and memory. That performance improves with repetitions is one of the basic phenomena to be explained. Nonetheless, there is not an adequate explanation of when, how, or why repetitions are effective. No single-process theory, nor many multiprocess theories, can account for all, or even most, of the empirical findings. The goal of this article is to present a theoretical framework that integrates a number of different repetition-effect phenomena and that makes a variety of new predictions.Specifica11y, the theory is designed to account for distributed practice and spacing effects found with verbal stimuli in a majority of verbal learning and memory paradigms. The distributed practice effect refers to enhanced memory performance on repeated iterns whose presentations are distributed (either through time or through time and other presentations), as opposed to performance on items whose presentations are massed or contiguous. In addition, in many situations the amount of distribution is positively correlated with performance. As the spacing, or lag, between the presentations increases, performance genera11y shows a concomitant, negatively accelerated improvement (Melton, 1970). Distributed practice effects, in one sense, have been difficult to explain because of their ubiquity across both tasks and information processing strategies (Underwood,

show abstract

General psychology in terms of behavior.

Cited by 54 publications

References 0 publications

The cue-dependent nature of state-dependent retrieval

The cue-dependent nature of state-dependent retrieval

Enhancement of recall using multiple environmental contexts during learning

Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About