Implicit contributions of context to recognition

Manier, David; Apetroaia, Ioana; Pappas, Zissis; Hirst, William

doi:10.1016/j.concog.2004.06.006

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Along those lines, our results support numerous others in asserting that implicit processes have an impact on recognition (which is an explicit or conscious process; see e.g. Cleary & Green, 2000;Langley et al, 2008;Manier et al, 2004). These results reiterate the findings of studies that have used verbal materials (see e.g.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

“…Therefore, it seems that a procedure based on recognition of pictures of everyday scenes could be a suitable procedure to overcome the limitations inherent in using verbal materials (see e.g. Manier, Apetroaia, Pappas, & Hirst, 2004).…”

Section: Pitarque and Sáezmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We will also manipulate temporal conditions between subjects (immediate recognition vs. one week's delay; see e.g. Algarabel, Pitarque, & Gotor, 2006;Diana et al, 2004;Dudukovic & Knowlton, 2006;Manier et al, 2004). With the same objective in mind, in the forced choice task, we will follow the procedure proposed by Voss and Paller (2009).…”

Section: Pitarque and Sáezmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Role of Perceptual Information in Familiarity-Based Scene Recognition

Pitarque

Sáez

2012

Span. j. psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A method to analyze the role of familiarity in recognizing pictures of everyday scenes is introduced. The idea is to manipulate two within-subjects conditions: an experimental condition where the scenes repeat perceptual information (e.g. buildings and/or vehicles) and a control condition. The results show the two conditions did not differ in terms of hit rates, but in the experimental condition there were significantly fewer false alarms, yielding better results, which supports the findings of past research studies that have used verbal materials. This perceptual facilitation was maintained throughout a week-long retention interval. Finally, a detailed analysis of this facilitation shows it was due to a significant reduction in false alarms on know judgments, emphasizing familiarity's role in explaining this effect. Keywords: familiarity, scene recognition, remember and know judgments.Presentamos un método para analizar el papel que la familiaridad juega en el reconocimiento de fotografías de escenas cotidianas. La idea consiste en manipular dos condiciones intrasujeto: una condición experimental en la que se presentan fotografías en las que se repite información perceptual (p.e. edificios y/o vehículos) frente a otra condición control. Los resultados muestran que no hay diferencias en las tasas de aciertos de ambas condiciones, pero sí una reducción significativa de las falsas alarmas en la condición experimental, lo que provoca una mejor rendimiento en esta condición, patrón de resultados que coincide con el hallado utilizando materiales verbales. Dicha facilitación perceptual se mantiene así mismo tras una semana del estudio de los materiales. Por último el análisis pormenorizado de dicha facilitación nos muestra que es debida principalmente a una reducción significativa de las falsas alarmas en los juicios saber, lo que remarca el papel que la familiaridad juega en la explicación de dicho efecto. Palabras clave: familiaridad, reconocimiento de fotografías, juicios de recordar y saber.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 52%

Section: Pitarque and Sáezmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Pitarque and Sáezmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Role of Perceptual Information in Familiarity-Based Scene Recognition

Pitarque

Sáez

2012

Span. j. psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although contribution‐based and alphabetical author listings are the two norms in science, some research teams do not use either method to order names of authors. When contributions are considered equal, some teams use games of chance, such as a coin flip to determine order (e.g., Eisenberg‐berg & Lennon, 1980; Kirmani & Campbell, 2004; Manier, Apetroaia, Pappas, & Hirst, 2004) or proximity to tenure decisions (e.g., Roderick & Gillespie, 1998). Other papers list less descriptive methods by simply stating authorship was determined by “chance” (e.g., Markman & Gentner, 1996), “lottery” (e.g., Miyazaki, Grewal, & Goodstein, 2005), or “random process” (e.g., Balsam & Bondy, 1983).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying authorship: A comparison of authorship rubrics from five disciplines

Whetstone

Sandy

2020

Proc Assoc Inf Sci Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Transparency in authorship is a continuing topic in information science and scholarly communication. The process of determining authorship order in multi‐author publications, however, can be complicated. Authorship rubrics helping teams arrive at authorship order exist, but the extent to which certain roles are quantified (or not) and rewarded with authorship is unclear. This study examines eight authorship rubrics from five disciplines in the sciences and social sciences and evaluates their alignment with the Contributor Role Taxonomy (CRediT) framework; authorship rubrics are also compared on how they assign authorship credit and determine authorship order. Findings indicate that work on the methodology and the initial writing of the manuscript are most consistently quantified in authorship rubrics across the disciplines. Procedures for awarding authorship credit vary widely and methods for tie‐breaking rubric scores range from systematic to arbitrary. These findings suggest that regardless of discipline, contributions to carrying out and writing up research are seen as criteria for authorship. Differences in procedures for ordering authors may result, however, in different author order based on the chosen rubric. Ultimately, the fitness of use for authorship rubrics should be carefully considered by members of research teams, especially if the teams are comprised of interdisciplinary members.

show abstract

“…This advantage was found even when participants failed in a direct test of memory for the contextual information (e.g., whether a specific item was studied as a picture or as a word). Hence, it is considered as an indirect measure of memory that is not frontal lobe dependent (Manier, Apetroaia, Pappas, & Hirst, 2004). Therefore, it was predicted that despite the difference in frontal lobe maturation, both younger and older children would show context effects to the same extent; that is, they would benefit equally from the contextual similarity between target and test stages (i.e., in the PWP condition).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%