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

Retrieval processes in continuous recognition.

W E Hockley

    Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition
    |November 1, 1982
    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

    Interrupting recognition memory: tests of familiarity-based accounts of the revelation effect.

    Memory & cognition·2002
    Same author

    Interrupting recognition memory: tests of a criterion-change account of the revelation effect.

    Memory & cognition·2002
    Same author

    Recollection and familiarity through the looking glass: when old does not mirror new.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2001
    Same author

    The revelation effect for item and associative recognition: familiarity versus recollection.

    Memory & cognition·2000
    Same author

    Familiarity and recollection in item and associative recognition.

    Memory & cognition·1999
    Same author

    Shades of the mirror effect: recognition of faces with and without sunglasses.

    Memory & cognition·1999
    Same journal

    Memory loves company: Related object pairs benefit working memory.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
    Same journal

    Ranschburg unrepeated.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
    Same journal

    It was the best of times, it was the worst of times: Evidence for switch cost beyond stimulus-response tasks.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
    Same journal

    Testing the predictions of a distinctiveness model of memory: The production effect in backward recall.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
    Same journal

    On the impact of adjacency on transposed-word effects under serial presentation.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
    Same journal

    It's time to opt out: Metacognitive analysis of time regulation under uncertainty.

    Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition·2026
    See all related articles

    This study investigated memory recognition decisions using the continuous recognition paradigm. Findings suggest item repetition and stimulus type influence response latency, challenging existing memory models.

    Area of Science:

    • Cognitive Psychology
    • Human Memory Research
    • Experimental Psychology

    Background:

    • Understanding the factors influencing recognition memory accuracy and response speed is crucial for cognitive models.
    • Previous models, such as Atkinson and Juola's (1973) and Murdock's (1974) conveyor-belt model, have attempted to explain recognition processes.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To examine how lag (intervening items) and item characteristics affect yes/no recognition decisions.
    • To test the predictive power of existing memory models against empirical data.

    Main Methods:

    • Utilized the continuous recognition paradigm across three experiments.
    • Manipulated lag (0-40 items) as the primary independent variable.
    • Introduced item repetition and noun/nonnoun stimulus variations.

    Related Experiment Videos

    Main Results:

    • A logarithmic function accurately described the relationship between lag and correct response latency.
    • Item repetition primarily affected the intercept, while stimulus type influenced the slope of the logarithmic functions.
    • Observed repetition effects were consistent across different experimental manipulations of stimulus type.

    Conclusions:

    • Existing models by Atkinson and Juola, and Murdock, were found incompatible with the experimental results.
    • Retrieval theory (Ratcliff, 1978) and the multiple-observations model (Pike et al., 1977) offer better explanations for the findings.
    • Both favored models may require refinement to fully account for observed item repetition effects in recognition memory.