Elaborative processing and conjunction errors in recognition memory
- PMID: 18630197
- DOI: 10.3758/mc.36.5.899
Elaborative processing and conjunction errors in recognition memory
Abstract
Four experiments were conducted in order to examine the influence of elaborative processing at encoding on recognition memory conjunction lure errors. In these experiments, participants generated cues for compound words as wholes (e.g., haywire) or as separate entities (e.g., hay, wire). Studied words were re-presented in exact form (old) or recombined to form conjunction lures on the recognition test. Participants were asked to make old-new judgments and to indicate whether they had rejected items judged to be new because of recall of a studied item or because of lack of familiarity with an item. The results suggested that recall-to-reject processing and conjunction lure familiarity increased with both types of generation, although generation of cues for compound words as a whole did not influence conjunction lure error rates. An emphasis on processing each constituent of a compound word during encoding increased the familiarity of those constituents more than generation of a compound word as a whole, resulting in an increase in conjunction lure errors. These results suggest that both familiarity and recollection-based monitoring processes influence conjunction lure errors, and therefore support dual-process theories of recognition memory.
Similar articles
-
When false recognition is out of control: the case of facial conjunctions.Mem Cognit. 2009 Mar;37(2):143-57. doi: 10.3758/MC.37.2.143. Mem Cognit. 2009. PMID: 19223564
-
Conjunction errors and semantic transparency.Mem Cognit. 2010 Jan;38(1):47-56. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.1.47. Mem Cognit. 2010. PMID: 19966238 Free PMC article.
-
Memory conjunction clusters: Influence of familiarity and recollection.Memory. 2016 Jul;24(6):792-800. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2015.1051052. Epub 2015 Aug 18. Memory. 2016. PMID: 26284615
-
Conjunction error rates on a continuous recognition memory test: little evidence for recollection.J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 Mar;28(2):374-9. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002. PMID: 11911393
-
Kelley's Paradox and strength skewness in research on unconscious mental processes.Psychon Bull Rev. 2025 Apr;32(2):614-635. doi: 10.3758/s13423-024-02578-1. Epub 2024 Oct 15. Psychon Bull Rev. 2025. PMID: 39406983 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
When and why do retrieval attempts enhance subsequent encoding?Mem Cognit. 2012 May;40(4):505-13. doi: 10.3758/s13421-011-0174-0. Mem Cognit. 2012. PMID: 22238214
-
When false recognition is out of control: the case of facial conjunctions.Mem Cognit. 2009 Mar;37(2):143-57. doi: 10.3758/MC.37.2.143. Mem Cognit. 2009. PMID: 19223564
-
Autobiographical memory conjunction errors in younger and older adults: Evidence for a role of inhibitory ability.Psychol Aging. 2016 Dec;31(8):927-942. doi: 10.1037/pag0000129. Psychol Aging. 2016. PMID: 27929343 Free PMC article.
-
Conjunction errors and semantic transparency.Mem Cognit. 2010 Jan;38(1):47-56. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.1.47. Mem Cognit. 2010. PMID: 19966238 Free PMC article.
-
Pre-stimulus neural activity predicts successful encoding of inter-item associations.Neuroimage. 2015 Jan 15;105:21-31. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.10.046. Epub 2014 Oct 23. Neuroimage. 2015. PMID: 25450109 Free PMC article.
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Medical