Type I rehearsal and recognition

Glenberg, Arthur M.; Adams, Fred

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(78)90274-8

Cited by 61 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean proportions of digit sequences correctly recalled for 4-and l2-sec intervals were .87 and .87 for the incidental-learning condition and .67 and .68 for the intentional-learning condition. This null effect of rehearsal interval on the recall of digit sequences has been found at times in other maintenancerehearsal experiments (e.g., Glenberg & Adams, 1978;Glenberg & Bradley, 1979;Glenberg et al, 1977). …”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 51%

Incidental learning of event frequency

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments studied the effect of intentionality of learning on memory for the frequency of occurrence of words on a list. Subjects who learned the items intentionally in preparation for an unspecified memory test remembered frequency as accurately as did those who studied specifically for a frequency-estimation test. Both groups recalled frequency information more accurately than did a group that learned the words incidentally. These results, along with a review of the literature, suggest that there is no strong evidence for the automatic encoding of frequency information.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 51%

Incidental learning of event frequency

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sheer maintenance rehearsal affects familiarity, but not retrieval, probabilities (Mandler, 1979). In that context Glenberg and Adams (1978) showed that maintenance rehearsal (Type 1 rehearsal in Craik & Lockhart's, 1972, terminology) affected primarily the acoustic-phonemic components of a tobe-remembered item, rather than semantic or contextual components. Thus, this study provided additional evidence for the conclusion that properly conducted primary or maintenance rehearsal works to enhance the integration of the target event in terms of its physical, perceptual characteristics.…”

Section: Evidence: Direct and Indirectmentioning

confidence: 97%

Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence.

Mandler¹

1980

Psychological Review

2,559

100

2,128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Several suggestions for a class of theories of recognition memory have been proposed during the past decade. These models address predictions about judgments of prior occurrence of an event, not the identification of what it is, The history and current status of one of these models is discussed. The model postulates the detection of familiarity and the utilization of retrieval mechanisms as additive and separate processes. The phenomenal experience of familiarity is assigned to intraevent organizational integrative processes; retrieval depends on interevent elaborative processes. Other current theoretical options are described, and relevant supportive data from the literature are reviewed. New tests of the model involving both free recall and word pair paradigms are presented. The dual process model is extended to the word frequency effect and to the recognition difficulties of amnesic patients.

show abstract

“…To do this, we have based two experiments on a procedure used by Nairne (1983) in which attention was divided during encoding with a modified Brown-Peterson distractor paradigm (Glenberg & Adams, 1978;Rundus, 1970). For both experiments, subjects were engaged in a working memory span task for digit strings.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissociating familiarity from recollection using rote rehearsal

2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recollection-based recognition memory judgments benefit greatly from effortful elaborative encoding, whereas familiarity-based judgments are much less sensitive to such manipulations. In this study, we have examined whether rote rehearsal under divided attention might produce the opposite dissociation, benefiting familiarity more than recollection. Subjects rehearsed word pairs during the "distractor" phase of a working memory span task, and were then given a surprise memory test for the distractor items at the end of the experiment. Experiment 1 demonstrated that increasing rehearsal elevated the recognition rate for intact and rearranged pairs, but neither associative recognition accuracy nor implicit fragment completion benefited from rehearsal. The results suggest that rote rehearsal leads to a greater increase in familiarity than in recollection, and that the increase in observed familiarity cannot be attributed to effects of repetition priming. In Experiment 2, we tested item recognition with the remember/know procedure, and the results supported the conclusions of Experiment 1. Moreover, a signal detection model of remember/know performance systematically overpredicted rehearsal increases in remember rates, and this worsened when high-rehearsal items were assumed to be more variable in strength. The results suggest that rote rehearsal can dissociate familiarity from recollection at the time of encoding and that item recognition cannot be fully accommodated within a one-dimensional signal detection model.

show abstract

Type I rehearsal and recognition

Cited by 61 publications

References 13 publications

Incidental learning of event frequency

Incidental learning of event frequency

Recognizing: The judgment of previous occurrence.

Dissociating familiarity from recollection using rote rehearsal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About