Recognition hypermnesia: How to get it

Bergstein, Jacquelyn; Erdelyi, Matthew Hugh

doi:10.1080/09658210802169095

Cited by 37 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on reminiscence (i.e., recall of previously unrecallable items without relearning) has mostly focused on recall tests not recognition tests. However, increased net recall over successive recall efforts has also been shown for recognition memory (Bergstein & Erdelyi, 2008). This hypermnesic effect is generally not attributable to changes in memory that occur over time, but rather attributable to repeated testing (Roediger & Payne, 1982) or to additional retrieval time (Roediger & Thorpe, 1978).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No source memory for unrecognized items when implicit feedback is avoided

Malejka

Bröder

2015

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a recent empirical study, Starns, Hicks, Brown, and Martin (Memory & Cognition, 36, 1-8 2008) collected source judgments for old items that participants had claimed to be new and found residual source discriminability depending on the old-new response bias. The authors interpreted their finding as evidence in favor of the bivariate signal-detection model, but against the twohigh-threshold model of item/source memory. According to the latter, NEW responses only follow from the state of old-new uncertainty for which no source discrimination is possible, and the probability of entering this state is independent of the old-new response bias. However, when missed old items were presented for source discrimination, the participants could infer that the items had been previously studied. To test whether this implicit feedback led to second retrieval attempts and thus to source memory for presumably unrecognized items, we replicated Starns et al. 's (Memory & Cognition, 36, 1-8 2008) finding and compared their procedure to a procedure without such feedback. Our results challenge the conclusion to abandon discrete processing in source memory; source memory for unrecognized items is probably an artifact of the procedure, by which implicit feedback prompts participants to reconsider their recognition judgment when asked to rate the source of old items in the absence of item memory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

No source memory for unrecognized items when implicit feedback is avoided

Malejka

Bröder

2015

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a typical experiment on hypermnesia, the initial test occurs shortly after study without any major delay between study and test. Indeed, most hypermnesia studies employed a short delay between study and test of 1 or 2 min only, mainly to distribute the recall protocols or give detailed test instructions (e.g., Bergstein & Erdelyi, 2008;Kelley & Nairne, 2003;Mulligan, 2002;Payne & Roediger, 1987). Other studies additionally included filler tasks of 2 or 3 min to reduce possible recency effects (e.g., Mulligan, 2005;Otani, Widner, Whiteman, & Louis, 1999), employed a delay of 5 min with the subjects' instruction to think silently about the list items (Shapiro & Erdelyi, 1974), or employed a delay of about 12 min, asking subjects to participate in a distractor task and complete a questionnaire (Wheeler & Roediger, 1985).…”

Section: The Possible Role Of Delay Between Study and Test For Hypermmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypermnesia and the Role of Delay between Study and Test

Wallner

Bäuml

2018

Mem Cogn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hypermnesia is increased recall across repeated tests in the absence of any further study opportunities. Although over the years many factors have been identified that influence hypermnesia, to date not much is known about the role of delay between study and test for the effect. This study addressed the issue in four experiments. Employing both words and pictures as study material, we compared hypermnesia after shorter delay (3 min or 11.5 min) and longer delay (24 h or 1 week) between study and test. Recall occurred over three successive tests, using both free recall (Experiments 1, 2, and 4) and forced recall testing (Experiment 3). In forced recall tests, subjects are instructed to recall as many items as possible, but if unable to remember all studied items, to fill in the remaining spaces with their best guesses. With free recall testing, hypermnesia increased with delay and the effect was driven mainly by reduced item losses between tests. These results suggest a link between hypermnesia and the testing effect, which shows that demanding retrieval practice, as it happens after longer delay, can improve recall by reducing the forgetting of the practiced items. In contrast, with forced recall testing, hypermnesia decreased with delay and was even absent after longer delay. The findings indicate that recall format can influence hypermnesia and different mechanisms may mediate the effects of repeated testing in the two recall conditions.

show abstract

“…Hypermnesia experiments have been carried out by administering repeated trials of the same Rcl test with shorter and longer intervals (Erdelyi, 1996, 90-04). Erdelyi (1996) and Bergstein and Erdelyi (2008) suggest that very long interval (months after) hypermnesia results are probably due to the stimuli itself. Effective stimuli can be narrative texts or stories that foster great imagistic and elaborative encoding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Children’s recall and motivation for an environmental education video with supporting pedagogical materials

Viteri

Clarebout

Crauwels

2013

Environmental Education Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined recall (Rcl) differences of high, average and low achieving fifth-grade elementary students (72) for an environmental education video with supporting pedagogical materials. In addition, it assessed the motivational level of all students. Recall assessment was carried out one-week and twenty-weeks after intervention. Main findings suggest comparative Rcl results for all achievers and high motivation for the designed video and pedagogical materials. Implications for future research and for an integrative materials' design approach are presented.

show abstract

Recognition hypermnesia: How to get it

Cited by 37 publications

References 46 publications

No source memory for unrecognized items when implicit feedback is avoided

No source memory for unrecognized items when implicit feedback is avoided

Hypermnesia and the Role of Delay between Study and Test

Children’s recall and motivation for an environmental education video with supporting pedagogical materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About