Abstracts 2005 - The Psychonomic Society

Friday Noon Posters 2035–2041
(2035)
Why Does Feedback Improve Recognition Memory for Unfamiliar
Melodies, but Not for Words? JUSTIN KANTNER & D. STEPHEN
LINDSAY, University of Victoria—The question of whether trial-bytrial
feedback at test (without test item repetition or repeated study–test
cycles) can improve recognition memory bears on both theoretical accounts
of recognition and the development of rehabilitation programs
for individuals with memory impairments. Yet the effect of feedback
on recognition memory has received little empirical attention. A series
of experiments in our lab using words as stimuli failed to show
any effect of feedback on recognition accuracy or confidence, a result
consistent with theories characterizing recognition as strictly familiarity
based but inconsistent with those suggesting that inferential
processes inform recognition memory judgments. In two experiments
using highly complex and structured but unfamiliar materials (short
clips of traditional Korean music), however, feedback did improve
recognition accuracy: Subjects receiving feedback showed significantly
lower false alarm rates than did controls. Potential explanations
for this pattern of findings, as well as implications for single- versus
dual-process theories of recognition, are considered.
(2036)
Improving Memory for Information From Text: Benefits of Retrieval
Practice With and Without Re-Presentations. CATHERINE
O. FRITZ, PETER E. MORRIS, PETER J. HAMPSON, & CAROLINE
WADE, Lancaster University—Retrieval practice can be effective in
improving memory for information from expository texts. We briefly
summarize recent research and present new data. Participants read a
short expository text and then practiced answering questions of fact
based on the text. Retrieval practice improved memory for the information,
as measured by criterion tests shortly after the practice session
and 1 week later. For some participants, practice tests were accompanied
by immediate re-presentation of the correct information.
The inclusion of re-presentations did not lead to a lazy response style
(i.e., being less likely to produce the answers) during practice. With
re-presentations, performance improved with each practice event. Following
practice with re-presentations, performance was better on the
initial criterion test and remained better across the delay. Although representations
led to better recall, there was little evidence that they retarded
loss over the intervening week.
(2037)
Self-Generated Versus Experimenter-Supplied Mediators in Learning
and Remembering Indonesian–English Word Pairs. ROBERT J.
CRUTCHER, University of Dayton—An important issue in memory
research is the effectiveness of self-generated versus experimentersupplied
mediators in remembering unfamiliar material. In the present
study, subjects learned Indonesian–English word pairs (e.g.,
bulan–moon) using the keyword method (e.g., the keyword bullet
sounds like bulan and can be used to imagine a bullet shot through the
moon). For half of the pairs, subjects studied the Indonesian word and
its English translation using supplied keywords (e.g., bulan–bullet–
moon). For the other half of the pairs, subjects saw only the Indonesian
and English word pair (e.g., bulan–moon) and had to generate
their own keyword mediator while learning the pair. Subjects were
tested on the word pairs within a cued recall paradigm. Results showed
significantly higher recall of the Indonesian–English pairs learned
with self-generated keyword mediators than of the pairs learned with
experimenter-supplied mediators.
(2038)
Item and Relational Information Theory: Applied Evidence From
Commercial Sponsorship. CLINTON S. WEEKS, MICHAEL S.
HUMPHREYS, & T. BETTINA CORNWELL, University of Queensland
(sponsored by Michael S. Humphreys)—Einstein and Hunt’s
(1980; Hunt & Einstein, 1981) item and relational information propositions
regarding semantic relatedness and orientation toward encoding
were examined in the applied setting of commercial sponsorship.
75
Theoretically, congruent sponsor–sponsee pairings (e.g., sportswear
brands sponsoring sporting events) should be encoded automatically
as relational information, whereas incongruent pairings (e.g., telecommunications
brands sponsoring sporting events) should be encoded
automatically as item information. Improved memory should result
from orienting individuals toward encoding the alternative form of information.
Using a 2 � 3 within-subjects experimental design, participants
listened to 12 (congruent and incongruent) sponsorship press
announcements, each of which incorporated either relational (sponsor–
sponsee linking), item (sponsor-specific and sponsee-specific), or
filler information about a sponsor–sponsee pairing. Supportive of
Einstein and Hunt’s propositions, results showed that providing item
information enhanced recall of congruent sponsors, but not of incongruent
sponsors, and that providing relational information dramatically
enhanced recall of incongruent sponsors and had lesser impact
on recall of congruent sponsors.
(2039)
Effect of Computer Display on Executing Navigation Instructions.
VIVIAN I. SCHNEIDER & ALICE F. HEALY, University of Colorado,
Boulder, IMMANUEL BARSHI, NASA Ames Research Center, &
JAMES T. PARKER, University of Colorado, Boulder—Subjects heard
navigation instructions for movement within a three-dimensional space
consisting of four stacked 4 � 4 grids. They repeated the instructions
aloud and then followed them, using six labeled keys (right/left,
up/down, forward/back). Three computer displays were compared.
The bird’s eye display showed a bird’s eye view of the entire space.
The desktop VR display showed only what might be visible inside the
space at any given instant. The blank screen display showed nothing
at all. Subjects were trained on one display and were retrained 1 week
later on either the same display or one of the other displays. Execution
performance improved across weeks. At retraining, subjects who
saw the same display both weeks and those who had the bird’s eye
view the second week performed better than did subjects in all other
groups. The results are discussed in terms of the subjects’ spatial representations
formed during training and retraining.
(2040)
Cued Repetition of Self-Directed Actions in Macaques: Evidence
for Episodic Memory? ANNIKA PAUKNER & JAMES R. ANDER-
SON, University of Stirling, PIER F. FERRARI, University of Parma,
& DAVID I. DONALDSON, University of Stirling—Recent work examining
episodic memory abilities in nonhuman animals suggests that
episodic memory may not be specific to humans. However, reliance
on recognition paradigms in this context is problematic because
nonepisodic (e.g., semantic or implicit) memory processes may influence
recognition performance. Here, we report a new experimental recall
paradigm that allows episodic memory to be tested in monkeys.
Two pig-tailed macaques were trained to perform three self-directed
actions in response to auditory cues and to repeat behaviors after hearing
an abstract repeat cue. We tested the monkeys for multiple memory
dimensions, long-term recall, and spontaneous transfer of the repeat
signal to novel behaviors. Both monkeys showed evidence of
multiple memory dimensions but failed to show evidence of long-term
recall and spontaneous transfers. Even though the monkeys cannot be
attributed with episodic memory abilities on the basis of the present
results, the paradigm offers a new, nonverbal assessment method for
comparative research.
• METAMEMORY •
(2041)
Metamemory Predictions Under Conditions of Implicit Interference:
Age-Related Differences in Cue Set Size Effects. DEBORAH
K. EAKIN, Mississippi State University, & CHRISTOPHER HERT-
ZOG, Georgia Institute of Technology—We evaluated the impact of
implicit interference on memory and metamemory for younger and
older adults. The degree of implicit interference was manipulated by