Why It’s Easier to Remember Seeing a Face We Already Know Than One We Don’t

Abstract

Two experiments tested the hypothesis that it is easier to bind a stimulus to context when the stimulus already has a stable (i.e., pre-existing) memory representation by comparing episodic memory of faces of celebrities vs. unknown individuals. Each face was superimposed on a picture of a well-known location (e.g., Eiffel Tower) during encoding and at a later unexpected recognition test but the background could change from encoding to test. Although recognition was to be based on the face, irrespective of background, performance was better when encoding context was reinstated. Further, a given background could be shown with many faces ("high fan") or only a few ("low fan") and this variable modulated the value added of context reinstatement. Importantly, manipulations of context only mattered for famous faces. As predicted, these effects were observed in recollection ("Remember") responses not in familiarity (“Know”) responses. Experiment 2 used the same design except that half of the subjects were administered midazolam, a drug that produces temporary anterograde amnesia, prior to encoding faces and backgrounds. Subjects injected with saline (control condition) showed the same pattern as Experiment 1; however subjects injected with midazolam showed a large decrease in the use of the "Remember" responses for famous faces and neither context reinstatement nor background fan affected performance. These results support the view that it is easier to bind stimuli to context when stimuli have a pre-existing, stable memory representation (e.g., faces of people whose identity we know) than when stimuli do not have pre-existing, stable memory representations.

Delineating the Effect of Semantic Congruency on Episodic Memory: The Role of Integration and Relatedness

“…The marked distinctiveness of congruent item-context pairs, suggests that they were encoded in a qualitatively "privileged" manner, perhaps via the enhancement of an episodic trace. This result resonates with previous studies demonstrating prior knowledge influences on episodic memory using source memory or recollection measures [ 7 , 36 , 44 – 47 ].…”

The influence of prior knowledge on the formation of detailed and durable memories.

“…Experiment 2 generally replicated the results of Experiment 1, demonstrating a reliable positive effect of prior knowledge on recognition memory accuracy driven by an increase in the likelihood of recollecting additional contextual information from the study episode (Brandt et al, 2005;Horry et al, 2010;Long et al, 2008;Long & Prat, 2002;Reder et al, 2013). Furthermore, Experiment 2 showed that the degree of prior knowledge associated with a given stimulus was indeed predictive of its likelihood of being recollected, as measured by both Remember and source memory accuracy.…”

“…Alternatively, the presence of prior knowledge has been argued to facilitate recollection and detailed recall, either by acting as a scaffold to support the encoding and recall of contextspecific details (Brandt, Cooper, & Dewhurst, 2005;Chase & Simon, 1973;Chase & Ericsson, 1981, 1982Ghosh & Gilboa, 2014;Rawson & Van Overschelde, 2008;Robin & Moscovitch, 2014; Van Overschelde, Rawson, Dunlosky, & Hunt, 2005), or by increasing the efficiency of encoding processes (Chase & Simon, 1973;Jackson & Raymond, 2008;Lupyan, Rakison, & McClelland, 2007). Many recent behavioural experiments support a positive relationship between prior knowledge and recollection using a Remember-Know procedure, indicating that prior knowledge, at the very least, facilitates subjective experience of recalling a study episode in more detail (Brandt, Cooper, & Dewhurst, 2005;Horry, Wright, & Tredoux, 2010;Long, Prat, Johns, Morris, & Jonathan, 2008;Long & Prat, 2002;Reder et al, 2013).…”

Metamemory in a familiar place: The effects of environmental context on feeling of knowing.

“…In these studies, it is usually found that varying context familiarity exerts a similar effect on hit rates and false alarm rates, leaving recognition discrimination unchanged. An additional effect of context reinstatement is sometimes found, such that recognition discrimination is better in the presence of a reinstated rather than re-paired context, but this effect seems to be weak and is most often obtained when encoding instructions require participants to associate items with their contexts (e.g., Gruppuso et al, 2007; Hockley, 2008; Reder et al, 2013). The results of the present study can be discussed in relation to the effects of context reinstatement and context familiarity in cued recall.…”