Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Process, not representation: reply to Radvansky (1999).

J R Anderson1, L M Reder

  • 1Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA. ja+@cmu.edu

Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
|July 16, 1999
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma: results from the non-Hodgkin's lymphoma classification project.

American journal of hematology·2001
Same author

Antiretroviral treatment in pregnancy.

The Hopkins HIV report : a bimonthly newsletter for healthcare providers·2001
Same author

Report from Geneva: women and HIV.

The Hopkins HIV report : a bimonthly newsletter for healthcare providers·2001
Same author

Cesarean section and perinatal transmission.

The Hopkins HIV report : a bimonthly newsletter for healthcare providers·2001
Same author

Outcomes of treatment of children and adolescents with recurrent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease with dexamethasone, etoposide, cisplatin, cytarabine, and l-asparaginase, maintenance chemotherapy, and transplantation: Children's Cancer Group Study CCG-5912.

Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology·2001
Same author

Does learning a complex task have to be complex? A study in learning decomposition.

Cognitive psychology·2001

Fan effects in memory retrieval depend on processing at recall, not situational representation. Evidence challenges previous claims, supporting the Adaptive Control of Thought--Rational (ACT-R) model

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Human Memory Research
  • Computational Neuroscience

Background:

  • The fan effect describes how retrieval time increases with the number of learned associations for a concept.
  • Previous research suggested retrieval time is independent of the number of elements within a situation.
  • The Adaptive Control of Thought--Rational (ACT-R) theory proposes attentional weighting influences retrieval efficiency.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the determinants of fan effects in human memory retrieval.
  • To evaluate the validity of situational models versus processing-based accounts of the fan effect.
  • To test predictions derived from the ACT-R theory regarding attentional control in memory retrieval.

Main Methods:

  • Experimental manipulation of information retrieval tasks.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of retrieval times and error rates.
  • Comparison of empirical data with predictions from competing theoretical models.

    • Main Results:

    • Evidence indicates that fan effects are driven by retrieval processes, not solely by situational representation.
    • Retrieval time was found to depend on the number of elements, contradicting prior claims.
    • Results support the ACT-R theory, showing participants can modulate attentional weightings to influence fan effects.

    Conclusions:

    • The size of fan effects is determined by retrieval processing, challenging situational model explanations.
    • The ACT-R model provides a robust framework for understanding differential fan effects through attentional control.
    • Findings align with broader ACT-R principles and offer consistency with other memory research.