Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 15, Issue 2, pp 237–255 | Cite as

Instability in memory phenomena: A common puzzle and a unifying explanation

Theoretical and Review Articles

Abstract

In mixed lists, stable free recall advantages are observed for encoding conditions that are unusual, bizarre, or attract extensive individual item elaboration relative to more common encoding conditions; but this recall advantage is often eliminated or reversed in pure lists. We attempt to explain this ubiquitous memory puzzle with an item-order account that assumes that (1) free recall of unrelated lists depends on order and item information; (2) unusual items attract greater individual item-processing but disrupt order encoding regardless of list composition; and (3) list composition determines differences in order encoding across unusual and common items. We show that the item-order account provides a unifying explanation of five memory phenomena for which the requisite data exist. The account also successfully anticipates pure-list reversals, in which the standard mixed-list recall pattern is obtained in pure, structured lists, a finding that competing accounts cannot handle. Extending the item-order account to other “established” recall phenomena may prove fruitful.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asch, S. E., & Ebenholtz, S. M. (1962). The process of free recall: Evidence for non-associative factors in acquisition and retention. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary & Applied, 54, 3–31.Google Scholar
  2. Benjamin, A. S. (2003). Predicting and postdicting the effects of word frequency on memory. Memory & Cognition, 31, 297–305.Google Scholar
  3. Burns, D. J. (1990). The generation effect: A test between single and multifactor theories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 1060–1067.Google Scholar
  4. Burns, D. J. (1996). The item-order distinction and the generation effect: The importance of order information in long-term memory. American Journal of Psychology, 109, 567–580.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Burns, D. J., Curti, E. T., & Lavin, J. C. (1993). The effects of generation on item and order retention in immediate and delayed recall. Memory & Cognition, 21, 846–852.Google Scholar
  6. Cermak, L. S. (1975). Improving your memory. Oxford: Norton.Google Scholar
  7. Cohen, R. L. (1981). On the generality of some memory laws. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 22, 267–281.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, R. L. (1983). The effect of encoding variables on the free recall of words and action events. Memory & Cognition, 11, 575–582.Google Scholar
  9. Collyer, S. C., Jonides, J., & Bevan, W. (1972). Images as memory aids: Is bizarreness helpful? American Journal of Psychology, 85, 31–38.Google Scholar
  10. Cox, S. D., & Wollen, K. A. (1981). Bizarreness and recall. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 18, 244–245.Google Scholar
  11. Craik, F. I., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268–294.Google Scholar
  12. Deese, J. (1960). Frequency of usage and number of words in free-recall: The role of association. Psychological Reports, 7, 337–344.Google Scholar
  13. DeLosh, E. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (1996). The role of order information in free recall: Application to the word-frequency effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1136–1146.Google Scholar
  14. Dewhurst, S. A., & Parry, L. A. (2000). Emotionality, distinctiveness, and recollective experience. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12, 541–555.Google Scholar
  15. deWinstanley, P. A., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (1996). Generation effects and the lack thereof: The role of transfer-appropriate processing. Memory, 4, 31–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Eichenbaum, H. (2004). Hippocampus: Cognitive processes and neural representations that underlie declarative memory. Neuron, 44, 109–120.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Einstein, G. O., & Hunt, R. R. (1980). Levels of processing and organization: Addictive effects of individual-item and relational processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 6, 588–598.Google Scholar
  18. Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (1987). Distinctiveness and the mnemonic benefits of bizarre imagery. In M. A. McDaniel & M. Pressley (Eds.), Imagery and related mnemonic processes: Theories, individual differences, and applications (pp. 78–102). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Engelkamp, J., & Dehn, D. M. (2000). Item and order information in subject-performed tasks and experimenter-performed tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 671–682.Google Scholar
  20. Engelkamp, J., Jahn, P., & Seiler, K. H. (2003). The item-order hypothesis reconsidered: The role of order information in free recall. Psychological Research, 67, 280–290.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Engelkamp, J., & Zimmer, H. D. (1997). Sensory factors in memory for subject-performed tasks. Acta Psychologica, 96, 43–60.Google Scholar
  22. Estes, W. K. (1972). An associative basis for coding and organization in memory. In A. W. Melton & E. Martin (Eds.), Coding processes in human memory (pp. 161–190). Washington, DC: Winston.Google Scholar
  23. Fuchs, A. H. (1969). Recall for order and content of serial word lists in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 82, 14–21.Google Scholar
  24. Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Golly-Häring, C., & Engelkamp, J. (2003). Categorical-relational and order-relational information in memory for subject-performed and experimenter-performed actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 965–975.Google Scholar
  26. Greene, R. L., Thapar, A., & Westerman, D. L. (1998). Effects of generation on memory for order. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 255–264.Google Scholar
  27. Gregg, V. H. (1976). Word frequency, recognition, and recall. In J. Brown (Ed.), Recall and recognition (pp. 183–216). Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  28. Gregg, V. H., Montgomery, D. C., & Castaño, D. (1980). Recall of common and uncommon words from pure and mixed lists. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 240–245.Google Scholar
  29. Gronlund, S. D., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1986). Retrieval strategies in recall of natural categories and categorized lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 550–561.Google Scholar
  30. Guynn, M. J., & McDaniel, M. A. (1999). Generate—sometimes recognize, sometimes not. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 398–415.Google Scholar
  31. Hadley, C. B., & MacKay, D. G. (2006). Does emotion help or hinder immediate memory? Arousal versus priority-binding mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 79–88.Google Scholar
  32. Hall, J. F. (1954). Learning as a function of word frequency. American Journal of Psychology, 67, 138–140.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Hauck, P., Walsh, C., & Kroll, N. (1976). Visual imagery mnemonics: Common vs. bizarre mental images. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 160–162.Google Scholar
  34. Hinrichs, J. V. (1970). A two-process memory strength theory for judgment of recency. Psychological Review, 77, 223–233.Google Scholar
  35. Hirshman, E., & Bjork, R. A. (1988). The generation effect: Support for a two-factor theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 484–494.Google Scholar
  36. Hirshman, E., & Mulligan, N. (1991). Perceptual interference improves explicit memory but does not enhance data-driven processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 507–513.Google Scholar
  37. Hirshman, E., Whelley, M. M., & Palij, M. (1989). An investigation of paradoxical memory effects. Journal of Memory & Language, 28, 594–609.Google Scholar
  38. Hunt, R. R., & Einstein, G. O. (1981). Relational and item-specific information in memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20, 497–514.Google Scholar
  39. Hunt, R. R., & Elliott, J. M. (1980). The role of nonsemantic information in memory: Orthographic distinctiveness effects on retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 49–74.Google Scholar
  40. Hunt, R. R., & McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The enigma of organization and distinctiveness. Journal of Memory & Language, 32, 421–445.Google Scholar
  41. Hunt, R. R., & Worthen, J. (Eds.) (2006). Distinctiveness and memory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Jacoby, L. L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 17, 649–667.Google Scholar
  43. Jacoby, L. L., & Hollingshead, A. (1990). Toward a generate/recognize model of performance on direct and indirect tests of memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 29, 433–454.Google Scholar
  44. Kinsbourne, M., & George, J. (1974). The mechanism of the word-frequency effect on recognition memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 13, 63–69.Google Scholar
  45. Kintsch, W. (1970a). Learning, memory, and conceptual processes. Oxford: Wiley.Google Scholar
  46. Kintsch, W. (1970b). Models for free recall and recognition. In D. A. Norman (Ed.), Models of human memory (pp. 331–373). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  47. Kintsch, W. (1978). More on recognition failure of recallable words: Implications for generation-recognition models. Psychological Review, 85, 470–473.Google Scholar
  48. Knoedler, A. J., Hellwig, K. A., & Neath, I. (1999). The shift from recency to primacy with increasing delay. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 474–487.Google Scholar
  49. Lee, C. L., & Estes, W. K. (1981). Item and order information in shortterm memory: Evidence for multilevel perturbation processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 7, 149–169.Google Scholar
  50. Lewandowsky, S., & Murdock, B. B. (1989). Memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 96, 25–57.Google Scholar
  51. Linton, M. (1975). Memory for real-world events. In D. Norman & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Explorations in cognition (pp. 376–404). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  52. Lorayne, H., & Lucas, J. (1974). The memory book. New York: Stein & Day.Google Scholar
  53. Mandler, G. (1969). Input variables and output strategies in free recall of categorized lists. American Journal of Psychology, 82, 531–539.Google Scholar
  54. Mandler, G., & Dean, P. J. (1969). Seriation: Development of serial order in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 207–215.Google Scholar
  55. May, R. B., Cuddy, L. J., & Norton, J. M. (1979). Temporal contrast and the word frequency effect. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 33, 141–147.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, D. C., Einstein, G. O., & O’Halloran, C. M. (1989). Modulation of environmental reinstatement effects through encoding strategies. American Journal of Psychology, 102, 523–548.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. McDaniel, M. A., DeLosh, E. L., & Merritt, P. S. (2000). Order information and retrieval distinctiveness: Recall of common versus bizarre material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 1045–1056.Google Scholar
  58. McDaniel, M. A., Dornburg, C. C., & Guynn, M. J. (2005). Disentangling encoding versus retrieval explanations of the bizarreness effect: Implications for distinctiveness. Memory & Cognition, 33, 270–279.Google Scholar
  59. McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (1986). Bizarre imagery as an effective memory aid: The importance of distinctiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 54–65.Google Scholar
  60. McDaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O., De Losh, E. L., May, C. P., & Brady, P. (1995). The bizarreness effect: It’s not surprising, it’s complex. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 422–435.Google Scholar
  61. McDaniel, M. A., & Geraci, L. (2006). Encoding and retrieval processes in distinctiveness effects: Toward an integrative framework. In J. Worthen & R. R. Hunt (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 65–88). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  62. McDaniel, M. A., Waddill, P. J., & Einstein, G. O. (1988). A contextual account of the generation effect: A three-factor theory. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 521–536.Google Scholar
  63. Merritt, P. S., DeLosh, E. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2006). Effects of word frequency on individual-item and serial order retention: Tests of the order-encoding view. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1615–1627.Google Scholar
  64. Merry, R. (1980). Image bizarreness in incidental learning. Psychological Reports, 46, 427–430.Google Scholar
  65. Mulligan, N. W. (1996). The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on implicit memory, explicit memory, and memory for source. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1067–1087.Google Scholar
  66. Mulligan, N. W. (1999). The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on organization and order: Investigating the roles of item-specific and relational information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 54–69.Google Scholar
  67. Mulligan, N. W. (2000a). Perceptual interference and memory for order. Journal of Memory & Language, 43, 680–697.Google Scholar
  68. Mulligan, N. W. (2000b). Perceptual interference at encoding enhances item-specific encoding and disrupts relational encoding: Evidence from multiple recall tests. Memory & Cognition, 28, 539–546.Google Scholar
  69. Mulligan, N. W. (2001). Word frequency and memory: Effects on absolute versus relative order memory and on item memory versus order memory. Memory & Cognition, 29, 977–985.Google Scholar
  70. Mulligan, N. W. (2002). The generation effect: Dissociating enhanced item memory and disrupted order memory. Memory & Cognition, 30, 850–861.Google Scholar
  71. Mulligan, N. W., & Lozito, J. P. (2007). Order information and free recall: Evaluating the item-order hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 732–751.Google Scholar
  72. Nairne, J. S. (1988). The mnemonic value of perceptual identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 248–255.Google Scholar
  73. Nairne, J. S. (1992). The loss of positional certainty in long-term memory. Psychological Science, 3, 199–202.Google Scholar
  74. Nairne, J. S., & Kelley, M. R. (2004). Separating item and order information through process dissociation. Journal of Memory & Language, 50, 113–133.Google Scholar
  75. Nairne, J. S., Riegler, G. L., & Serra, M. (1991). Dissociative effects of generation on item and order retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 702–709.Google Scholar
  76. Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2002). Human memory: An introduction to research, data, and theory. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  77. Nelson, D. L., & McEvoy, C. L. (2000). What is this thing called frequency? Memory & Cognition, 28, 509–522.Google Scholar
  78. Nelson, D. L., & Xu, J. (1995). Effects of implicit memory on explicit recall: Set size and word-frequency effects. Psychological Research, 57, 203–214.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  79. Nelson, D. L., & Zhang, N. (2000). The ties that bind what is known to the recall of what is new. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 604–617.Google Scholar
  80. Postman, L. (1972). A pragmatic view of organization theory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory (pp. 3–38). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  81. Pra Baldi, A., de Beni, R., Cornoldi, C., & Cavedon, A. (1985). Some conditions for the occurrence of the bizarreness effect in free recall. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 427–436.Google Scholar
  82. Ransdell, S. E., & Fischler, I. (1989). Effects of concreteness and task context on recall of prose among bilingual and monolingual speakers. Journal of Memory & Language, 28, 278–291.Google Scholar
  83. Rao, K. V., & Proctor, R. W. (1984). Study-phase processing and the word frequency effect in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 386–394.Google Scholar
  84. Roediger, H. L., III (2008). Relativity of remembering: Why the laws of memory vanished. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 225–254.Google Scholar
  85. Schmidt, S. R. (1991). Can we have a distinctive theory of memory? Memory & Cognition, 19, 523–542.Google Scholar
  86. Schmidt, S. R. (1994). Effects of humor on sentence memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 953–967.Google Scholar
  87. Senter, R. J., & Hoffman, R. R. (1976). Bizarreness as a nonessential variable in mnemonic imagery: A confirmation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 163–164.Google Scholar
  88. Serra, M., & Nairne, J. S. (1993). Design controversies and the generation effect: Support for an item-order hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 21, 34–40.Google Scholar
  89. Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 4, 592–604.Google Scholar
  90. Slamecka, N. J., & Katsaiti, L. T. (1987). The generation effect as an artifact of selective displaced rehearsal. Journal of Memory & Language, 26, 589–607.Google Scholar
  91. Soraci, S. A., Jr., Franks, J. J., Bransford, J. D., Chechile, R. A., Belli, R. F., Carr, M., & Carlin, M. (1994). Incongruous item generation effects: A multiple-cue perspective Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 67–78.Google Scholar
  92. Toglia, M. P., & Kimble, G. A. (1976). Recall and use of serial position information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 2, 431–445.Google Scholar
  93. Tulving, E., & Madigan, S. A. (1970). Memory and verbal learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 21, 437–484.Google Scholar
  94. Tulving, E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 5, 381–391.Google Scholar
  95. Tzeng, O. J. (1976). A precedence effect in the processing of verbal information. American Journal of Psychology, 89, 577–599.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Tzeng, O. J., Lee, A. T., & Wetzel, C. D. (1979). Temporal coding in verbal information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 5, 52–64.Google Scholar
  97. Underwood, B. J. (1969). Attributes of memory. Psychological Review, 76, 559–573.Google Scholar
  98. Underwood, B. J. (1983). Attributes of memory. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
  99. Underwood, B. J., & Schulz, R. W. (1960). Meaningfulness and verbal learning. Philadelphia: Lippincott.Google Scholar
  100. Watkins, M. J., LeCompte, D. C., & Kim, K. (2000). Role of study strategy in recall of mixed lists of common and rare words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 239–245.Google Scholar
  101. Webber, S. M., & Marshall, P. H. (1978). Bizarreness effects in imagery as a function of processing level and delay. Journal of Mental Imagery, 2, 291–300.Google Scholar
  102. White, R. (2002). Memory for events after twenty years. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 603–612.Google Scholar
  103. Wollen, K. A., & Cox, S. (1981). Sentence cuing and the effectiveness of bizarre imagery. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 7, 386–392.Google Scholar
  104. Wollen, K. A., & Margres, M. G. (1987). Bizarreness and the imagery multiprocess model. In M. A. McDaniel & M. Pressley (Eds.), Imagery and related mnemonic processes: Theories, individual differences, and applications (pp. 103–128). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  105. Wollen, K. A., Weber, A., & Lowry, D. H. (1972). Bizarreness versus interaction of mental images as determinants of learning. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 518–523.Google Scholar
  106. Worthen, J. B. (2006). Resolution of discrepant memory strengths: An explanation of the effects of bizarreness on memory. In R. R. Hunt & J. B. Worthen (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 133–156). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  107. Worthen, J. B., Garcia-Rivas, G., Green, C. R., & Vidas, R. A. (2000). Tests of a cognitive-resource-allocation account of the bizarreness effect. Journal of General Psychology, 127, 117–144.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. Zaromb, F. M. (2007). The effects of effort after meaning on recall in within and between subjects designs. Unpublished master’s thesis, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
  109. Zucco, G., Traversa, A. B., & Cornoldi, C. (1984). Il ruolo di dettagli non essenziali e della loro predicibilita contestuale nella rievocazione di nemi di figure [The role of nonessential details and of their contextual predictivity in the recall of names of pictures]. Ricerche di Psicologia, 4, 44–58.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWashington UniversitySt. Louis

Personalised recommendations