Priming in recognition memory for categorized lists.

Abstract

Previous research on primed recognition of categorized lists has shown two discrepant patterns of results, for which there has not been a conclusive explanation. Sometimes rejection of negative recognition test items (lures) was inhibited as a consequence of semantic priming, whereas at other times processing of negative test items was facilitated. This article investigates the reasons for that discrepancy by focusing on the differences between the tasks used to effect priming in the various previous studies. The first two experiments in this paper showed that lure processing is facilitated when priming is achieved through another recognition test item, whereas inhibition is obtained if a semantic category judgment task is performed on the priming items. Thus, both patterns can be reproduced under nearly identical circumstances, with the type of prime processing being the only difference. Two additional experiments are reported that served to generalize the inhibition found in the second experiment to other semantic priming tasks. The data show that the type of processing done on the prime determines whether inhibition or facilitation of lure rejection is obtained. Inhibition is obtained when a semantic task is used to prime a recognition judgment, whereas facilitation results from priming with an episodic task. The results are interpreted in the framework of the semantic/episodic distinction.

Level of discrimination for recognition judgments reduced following the recognition of semantically related words

“…In previous studies of episodic recognition, the general finding has been that semantic priming either facilitates correct recognition judgments to old and new test words (Johns, 1985;Lewandowsky, 1986), or facilitates and impedes correct recognition judgments to old and new test words, respectively . In previous studies of recognition, more generally construed, the general finding has been that semantic priming either increases or fails to affect the level of discrimination for recognition judgments to the test item Farah, 1989;Johns, 1985;Lewandowsky, 1986;Rhodes et al, 1993). Thus, the present results suggest an enlarged view of the effects of semantic priming on recognition judgments.…”

“…The task for Experiment 1A was closely modeled on the task of Lewandowsky (1986) except that the study lists were not categorized. Each study list consisted of 32 words and each test list consisted of 32 test pairs.…”

“…Here again, semantic relationships have been most extensively explored. Johns (1985) and Lewandowsky (1986) tested memory for lists of common nouns, each of which was composed of several words from each of several semantic categories. On each trial of the experimental procedure, the participant studied a list of words and then made recognition judgments to a series of pairs of words, with each pair consisting of a prime word and a test word.…”

“…Thus, priming increased the level of discrimination for recognition judgments to the test word. Dosher, McElree, Hood, and Rosedale (1989) tested memory for uncategorized lists of common nouns using a procedure that differed from that of Johns (1985) and Lewandowsky (1986) in that the lists were shorter and that no response was required to the prime word. On each trial of the Dosher et al procedure, the participant studied a list of words and then responded to a series of prime word/test word pairs.…”

“…In contrast to Johns (1985) and Lewandowsky (1986), we used uncategorized rather than categorized lists. In contrast to , we required successive recognition judgments to the prime word and the test word.…”