Abstracts 2005 - The Psychonomic Society

Saturday Noon Posters 4037–4043
sources. In two experiments, participants who were identified as high
suggestible on the GSS2 also made more source-monitoring errors than
low-suggestible participants on a later source-monitoring task.
(4037)
A Continuous Retrieval Process Explains the Use of Exclusionary
Source Information. JEFFREY J. STARNS & JASON L. HICKS,
Louisiana State University—We explored participants’ ability to attribute
items to target contexts when memory for an alternative context
could exclude the possibility that items were presented in the target
context (exclusive sources) versus when alternative contexts could
not disqualify the target source (overlapping sources). We tested a
threshold retrieval model and a continuous-dimension retrieval model
capable of making predictions regarding the role of exclusionary evidence
in source monitoring. We contrasted the models by fitting them
to source receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) and by testing
their predictions of how source ROCs change based on the availability
of exclusionary evidence. Across three experiments, the results of
both evaluation procedures suggest that people make source decisions
by evaluating a continuous dimension of evidence. When exclusionary
information is available, participants make decisions by comparing
the amount of evidence for the target source to the amount of evidence
for the alternative source.
(4038)
Evidence Against the Semantic Priming Account of Spacing Effects
in Cued-Memory Tasks. PETER P. J. L. VERKOEIJEN, REMY M. J. P.
RIKERS, DIANE PECHER, RENÉ ZEELENBERG, & HENK G.
SCHMIDT, Erasmus University Rotterdam—The spacing effect refers
to the finding that memory for repeated items improves when repetitions
are spaced during study. To date, the spacing effect in cuedmemory
tasks for semantically processed stimulus materials has been
explained with a semantic priming mechanism. According to this account,
greater levels of semantic priming generate lower memory performance.
The present study was conducted to test the semantic priming
account. In Experiment 1, participants studied either repetitions
or associated pairs. For repetitions, greater priming coincided with
lower memory performance, whereas for associated pairs, the reverse
pattern was found. In Experiment 2, participants made either the same
semantic decision or different decisions about massed and spaced repetitions.
In the same-decision condition, greater priming coincided
with lower memory performance. However, in the different-decision
condition, a spacing effect emerged, although priming did not differ
between massed and spaced repetitions. The results of both experiments
argue against the semantic priming account.
(4039)
Spacing and List Strength Effects Following Instructions to Rehearse.
PETER F. DELANEY, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, &
MARTIN E. KNOWLES, University of Florida—List strength effects
usually involve comparing mixed and pure lists containing “strong”
(i.e., spaced) and “weak” (i.e., massed) items. Under intentional learning
conditions, the magnitude of spacing effects in pure lists depends
on encoding strategy and tends to grow over successive study lists as
people change to deeper encoding strategies (Delaney & Knowles,
2005). The present work reports free recall and recognition studies
comparing mixed and pure lists when participants were instructed to
rote rehearse the items. Rehearsal instructions produced spacing effects
on mixed lists, but not on pure lists, for free recall. The same pattern
held for recognition, consistent with a rehearsal account of the
observed spacing effects and inconsistent with accounts purely in
terms of list strength. Rehearse-aloud protocols and recall protocols
were employed to understand how intentional rehearsal affects the
basis of spacing and list strength effects.
(4040)
What Gets Trained in the Repetition Lag Memory Training Paradigm?
HEATHER R. ROTH, DALE DAGENBACH, & JANINE M.
111
JENNINGS, Wake Forest University—The repetition lag memory
training procedure developed by Jennings and Jacoby (2003) significantly
improves recollection memory performance in older adults and
produces gains in measures of working memory and attention (Jennings
et al., in press). Previous research by the authors attempted to isolate
the basis of these gains by selectively interfering with the study and test
phases, using a concurrent variant of an n-back task. For the study
phase, this diminished, but did not eliminate, improvement in recollection
performance and, paradoxically, resulted in even stronger transfer
effects. The present research used concurrent random number generation
to more successfully eliminate improvement in the study phase,
along with reducing transfer effects. The implications of these findings
for the understanding of what is being trained will be considered.
(4041)
Context Effects on Remember–Know Judgments: The Influence of
Relative Word Frequency. DAVID P. MCCABE & DAVID A. BALOTA,
Washington University—Remember–know judgments have been viewed
as reflecting the direct output of different memory systems or processes.
We report two experiments suggesting, instead, that remember–know
judgments are sensitive to the context in which they are made. In Experiment
1, subjects studied medium-frequency words intermixed
with either high-frequency or low-frequency “context” words. Studying
medium-frequency words in the high-frequency context led to
more remember responses than did studying in the low-frequency context.
In Experiment 2, subjects studied a homogenous list of mediumfrequency
words, which were then tested in the context of highfrequency
or low-frequency distractors. Testing medium-frequency
words in the high-frequency context led to more remember judgments
than did testing in the low-frequency context. Together, these results
indicate that remember–know judgments are context dependent, rather
than reflecting the direct output of memory systems or processes. We
argue that subjects make remember judgments on the basis of a relative,
rather than an absolute, perception of distinctiveness.
(4042)
The Role of Attention in Emotional Memory Enhancement. DEBO-
RAH TALMI, ULRICH SCHIMMACK, THEONE PATERSON, LILY
RIGGS, & MORRIS MOSCOVITCH, University of Toronto—Emotionally
enhanced memory (EEM) may stem from enhanced attentional allocation
to emotional items or from their higher semantic relatedness.
To examine these alternatives, we manipulated attention by having
participants encode emotional, random neutral, and related neutral
scenes under full or divided attention. Immediate memory was tested
with free recall. Memory for emotional scenes was better than memory
for neutral scenes under both attention conditions. EEM was
larger under divided attention. Emotional scenes garnered more attention
than did neutral scenes, but this did not fully account for their
mnemonic advantage. EEM was found even when attention was manipulated
so that equivalent attention was allocated to neutral and
emotional scenes. Neither the attentional nor the semantic relatedness
explanations of EEM was supported in full, although they can account
for some of the observed effects. The results show that emotion has a
direct effect on memory, possibly by enhancing mechanisms implicated
in reexperiencing emotional events.
(4043)
The Influence of Emotional Valence on Contextual Novelty. BRETT
FROELIGER & REZA HABIB, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale
(sponsored by Lars Nyberg)—There are several forms of novelty.
One form, contextual novelty, arises when a stimulus occurs within an
unexpected context. Contextual novelty produces an orienting response
where increased attention is automatically diverted to the unexpected
stimulus and memory for it is enhanced. Here, we examined the effect
of emotional valence on contextual novelty. Reaction times were measured
while male participants (N = 20) rated the emotional valence of
positive and negative target pictures that followed either three positive
or three negative context pictures. The results indicated that subjects re-