2011
DOI: 10.3758/s13421-011-0133-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Testing the myth of the encoding–retrieval match

Abstract: The view that successful memory performance depends importantly on the extent to which there is a match between the encoding and retrieval conditions is commonplace in memory research. However, Nairne (Memory, 10, 389-395, 2002) proposed that this idea about trace-cue compatibility being the driving force behind memory retention is a myth, because one cannot make unequivocal predictions about performance by appealing to the encoding-retrieval match. What matters instead is the relative diagnostic value of th… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
40
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
40
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This is in line with another recent study that examined the orientation match between study and test in face recognition (Marzi and Viggiano, ). Recent research demonstrates that the extent to which a study‐test match supports retrieval is modulated by the degree to which a cue provides diagnostic information about a studied item (e.g., Goh and Lu, ; Poirier et al, ; see Nairne, for related discussion). Compared to upright face cues, presentation of inverted face cues increases reliance on feature‐based processing, in particular under the conditions of the current study in which image morphing introduced many overlapping features between the three faces in each display.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is in line with another recent study that examined the orientation match between study and test in face recognition (Marzi and Viggiano, ). Recent research demonstrates that the extent to which a study‐test match supports retrieval is modulated by the degree to which a cue provides diagnostic information about a studied item (e.g., Goh and Lu, ; Poirier et al, ; see Nairne, for related discussion). Compared to upright face cues, presentation of inverted face cues increases reliance on feature‐based processing, in particular under the conditions of the current study in which image morphing introduced many overlapping features between the three faces in each display.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A long-standing principle of memory holds that the likelihood of retrieval success varies with the amount of overlap between the processing engaged by an episode when it was initially experienced and the processing later engaged by a retrieval cue: the greater the overlap, the greater the likelihood of retrieval (Morris, et al, 1977; Tulving & Thomson, 1973; see Nairne, 2002 and Goh & Lu, 2012 for caveats). Thus, the ability to adjust cue processing so as to maximize study–test overlap would permit a cue to be optimally employed to meet different retrieval goals (Jacoby, Shimizu, Daniels, & Rhodes, 2005; Robb & Rugg, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“… Cues can also have detrimental effects on retrieval when the additional cue is strongly associated with many nontarget items. To truly be beneficial, the additional cues should be diagnostic or discriminative of the target (Goh & Lu, ; Nairne, ; Poirier et al., ). …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%