Relational and imageric recall in young and older adults under conditions of high task demand

Age and active navigation effects on episodic memory: A virtual reality study

“…When focusing on processes related to EM functioning, a number of data also support the view that older adults are impaired in terms of item‐specific processing but not relational processing (Basden, Basden, & Bartlett, ; Dennis, Kim, & Cabeza, ; Sharps, Day, Nunes, Neff, & Woo, ). Thus, enhancing the distinctiveness of information may prove beneficial for older adults in terms of higher recall and recognition (McCabe, Presmanes, Robertson, & Smith, ; Thomas & Sommers, ).…”

Ascending blocks enhance two-digit number recall

“…People can typically rely on item-specific information to recall pictures, which contain high levels of item-specific information, and are therefore not likely to produce blocked-random effects (Sharps et al, 1995). Consistent with this proposal, the blocked-random effect in picture recall is only found in conditions when item-specific information is more difficult to process and people must depend on relational information (Sharps, 1997;Sharps et al, 2004;Sharps et al, 1999;Sharps et al, 1995). The only exception to this pattern of findings was a study by Sharps et al (2004), which found a blocked-random effect with picture lists containing large numbers of categories.…”

“…For example, it has been demonstrated in many experiments studying free and cued recall of word presentations (Cofer et al, 1966;D'Agostino, 1969;Dallet, 1964;Gollin & Sharps, 1988;Lewis, 1971;Luek et al, 1971;Matthews & Hoggart, 1970;Puff, 1973;Sharps, 1997;Sharps et al, 2004;Sharps et al, 1999;Sharps & Pollitt, 1998;Sharps & Tindall, 1992;Sharps et al, 1995;Stones, 1973;Toglia et al, 1997). Also, Sharps and Pollitt (1998) demonstrated the effect with auditory stimuli (e.g., sounds from musical instruments, animals, or tools).…”

“…One specific type of organization that has been found to improve memory performance in many experiments is the blocking of items within lists by category (Cofer, Bruce, & Reicher, 1966;D'Agostino, 1969;Dallet, 1964;Engelkamp & Zimmer, 2002;Gollin & Sharps, 1988;Lewis, 1971;Luek, Mclaughlin, & Cicala, 1971;Matthews & Hoggart, 1970;Puff, 1973;Sharps, 1997;Sharps, Day, Nunes, Neff, & Woo, 2004;Sharps, Martin, Nunes, & Merrill, 1999;Sharps & Pollitt, 1998;Sharps & Tindall, 1992;Sharps, Wilson-Leff, & Price, 1995;Stones, 1973;Toglia, Hinman, Dayton, & Catalano, 1997). In blocked presentations, items from the same category are presented contiguously and there are distinct boundaries between categories (Puff, 1974).…”

“…This pattern of data is variously referred to as either the blocked-random effect (D'Agostino, 1969;Stones, 1973;Toglia et al, 1997) or the category superiority effect (Sharps, 1997;Sharps et al, 1999;Sharps & Pollitt, 1998;Sharps et al, 1995). Experiments investigating this effect have demonstrated higher categorical clustering in free recall following blocked presentations than in free recall following random presentations (Cofer, et al, 1966;Dallet, 1964;Engelkamp & Zimmer, 2002;Gollin & Sharps, 1988;Puff, 1973;Sharps et al, 2004;Sharps et al, 1999;Sharps & Tindall, 1992;Toglia et al, 1997). Clustering during free recall involves the blocking of items by category during recall or, in other words, recalling items from the same category contiguously (Bousfield, 1953).…”