Unit-sequence facilitation in recall

Postman, Leo; Fraser, Janat; Burns, Sheila

doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(68)80192-6

Cited by 6 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast to the amnesic patients, the control participants showed a slower rate of decline of free recall for the organized word lists. This is consistent with the earlier work of Postman et al (1968) and Runquist (1986). Unlike the results of Runquist, however, this pattern of performance was also found when rate of forgetting was measured as a percentage drop.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…There is much experimental evidence that the formation of these kinds of associations, which is encouraged when the material is semantically organized (e.g., Weingartner, 1964), results in superior free-recall performance compared with when the material consists of semantically unrelated or randomly presented items (e.g., see Cofer, Bruce, & Reicher, 1966; Deese, 1959; Rappold & Hashtroudi, 1991). Further evidence suggests that the formation of such associations can also attenuate rate of forgetting (e.g., Postman, Fraser, & Burns, 1968; Runquist, 1986).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: II. Recall and recognition of word lists at different levels of organization.

Isaac¹,

Mayes²

1999

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amnesic rate of decline of free recall, cued recall, and recognition of word lists with different levels of organization was investigated in 2 experiments. In Experiment 1, it was found that amnesic free recall of semantically related word lists declined at an accelerated rate, whereas free recall of lists of unrelated words declined at a normal rate. Cued recall and recognition performance of both kinds of word lists appeared to decline at a normal rate. In Experiment 2, the results of the free-recall and recognition conditions were replicated using an improved experimental design. The observed amnesic forgetting pattern is interpreted as arising from an impairment in consolidation of long-term memory for complex associations between 2 or more items and their study context that is caused by extended hippocampal system lesions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: II. Recall and recognition of word lists at different levels of organization.

Isaac¹,

Mayes²

1999

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, encoding or retrieval deficits for this kind of information may also be able to explain these findings. A deficit in encoding (processing and representing at input) inter-item associations could result in this pattern of forgetting because normal people, who encode such complex associations, seem to forget these at a slower rate than simple item–context associations they have encoded (e.g., Hockley, 1992; Postman, Fraser, & Burns, 1968). A deficit in effortful retrieval could account for such results if it was assumed that initial retrieval processes for complex associative information are relatively automatic, but that retrieval following a delay involves more effortful processes that are impaired in patients with amnesia.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: I. Recall and recognition of prose.

Isaac¹,

Mayes²

1999

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments explored the rate at which amnesic participants' free recall, cued recall, and recognition of prose declined over short filled delays. In Experiment 1, after performance had been matched to that of controls at 15s, amnesics showed accelerated forgetting over delays of up to 10 min in a free-recall condition, whereas recognition performance declined normally over delays of up to 1 hr. This pattern of results was replicated in Experiment 2, which showed that amnesic rate of forgetting on a test of cued recall was influenced by level of cuing. Experiment 3 showed that excessive sensitivity to interference was unlikely to be the cause of the amnesic patients' accelerated forgetting rate, which is instead explained in terms of storage deficit accounts of amnesia.

show abstract

“…With very common words, there was no difference. In a later experiment, however, Postman, Fraser, and Burns (1968) tested recall of strong associates and non-associated pairs after 48 hr. The strong associates were better retained.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of testing on the forgetting of related and unrelated associates.

Runquist¹

1986

Canadian Journal of Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Separate groups of subjects studied lists of word pairs in which the members of the pairs were either unrelated or strong or weak associates. A single study trial was given. In addition, one group received three study presentations on the unrelated list. An immediate cued recall test for half of the pairs was followed by a second test on all pairs either 10 min, 48 hr, or 1 week later. The associated pairs, both strong and weak, were forgotten less rapidly than the nonassociated pairs, but the effect was largely restricted to previously tested items. The results do not appear to be due to differences in the amount of interference present, but point to the importance of retrieval operations in the attenuation of forgetting. RESUME Des groupes differents de participants etudient, en un seul essai, des listes de paires de mots oil les membres des paires sont, soit non relies, soit fortement ou faiblement associes. Un groupe rec,oit en plus trois essais d'etude de la liste avec mots non relies. Un test immediat de rappel avec mot signal pour la moitie des paires est suivi d'un second test avec toutes les paires apres 10 min, 48 hr, ou 1 semaine. Les paires fortement et, faiblement associees sont moins rapidement oubliees que les paires non reliees, mais cet effet est largement reserve aux paires qui ont ete testees au prealable. Les resultats ne paraissent pas dependre de differences dans la quantite d'interference presente, mais soulignent plutot Fimportance des operations de reperage de l'information dans la diminution de 1'oubli.

show abstract

Unit-sequence facilitation in recall

Cited by 6 publications

References 8 publications

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: II. Recall and recognition of word lists at different levels of organization.

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: II. Recall and recognition of word lists at different levels of organization.

Rate of forgetting in amnesia: I. Recall and recognition of prose.

The effect of testing on the forgetting of related and unrelated associates.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About