Memory & Cognition

, Volume 6, Issue 3, pp 283–287 | Cite as

Memory performance and subject-defined depth of processing

  • John G. Seamon
  • Susan Virostek


This experiment found that subjects could order a series of classification questions in terms of their relative depth of processing. The subject-defined processing depth was used to predict performance in an incidental learning task which employed the same questions with different subjects. A significant rank correlation was obtained between question depth of processing and stimulus word free recall. These data provide an independent assessment of processing depth and memory performance and thereby satisfy a necessary, but not sufficient condition for the depth-of-processing hypothesis. Little success was achieved, however, in attempting to define the scheme relating processing depth and performance. While memory is related to encoding conditions, the search for the relational scheme continues.


Memory Performance Free Recall Serial Position Stimulus Word Incidental Learning 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Craik, F. I. M., &Lockhart, R. S. Levels of processing: A lramework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1972,11, 671–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Elias, C. S., &Perfetti, C. A. Encoding task and recognition memory: The importance of semantic encoding.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973,99, 151–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hyde, T. S., &Jenkins, J. J. Differential effects of incidental tasks on the organization of recall of a list of highly associated words.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969,82, 472–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kolers, P. A. Memorial consequences of automatized encoding.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1975,1, 689–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Nelson, T. O. Repetition and depth of processing.Journal of Verbal Learmng and Verbal Behavior, 1977,16, 151–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Paivio. A., Yuille. J. C., & Madigan, S. Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph Supplement, 1908.76(1, Part 2).Google Scholar
  7. Seamonr, J. G., &Murray, P. Depth of processing in recall and recognition memory: Differential effects of stimulus meaningfulness and serial position.Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Learning and Memory, 1976,2, 680–687.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Siegel, S.Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1956.Google Scholar
  9. Walsh, D. A., &Jenkins, J. J. Effects of orienting tasks on tree recall in incidental learning: “Difficulty,“ “effort.“ and “process“ explanations.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1973,12, 481–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • John G. Seamon
    • 1
  • Susan Virostek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWesleyan UniversityMiddletown

Personalised recommendations