Advertisement

Memory & Cognition

, Volume 46, Issue 8, pp 1287–1301 | Cite as

Item-specific processing reduces false recognition in older and younger adults: Separating encoding and retrieval using signal detection and the diffusion model

  • Mark J. Huff
  • Andrew J. Aschenbrenner
Article

Abstract

Our study examined processing effects in improving memory accuracy in older and younger adults. Specifically, we evaluated the effectiveness of item-specific and relational processing instructions relative to a read-only control task on correct and false recognition in younger and older adults using a categorized-list paradigm. In both age groups, item-specific and relational processing improved correct recognition versus a read-only control task, and item-specific encoding decreased false recognition relative to both the relational and read-only groups. This pattern was found in older adults despite overall elevated rates of false recognition. We then applied signal-detection and diffusion-modeling analyses, which separately utilized recognition responses and the latencies to those responses to estimate contributions of encoding and monitoring processes on recognition decisions. Converging evidence from both analyses demonstrated that item-specific processing benefits to memory accuracy were due to improvements of both encoding (estimates of d′ and drift rate) and monitoring (estimates of lambda and boundary separation) processes, and, importantly, occurred similarly in both younger and older adults. Thus, older and younger adults showed similar encoding-based and test-based benefits of item-specific processing to enhance memory accuracy.

Keywords

Item-specific processing Relational processing Distinctiveness Signal detection Diffusion modeling 

Supplementary material

13421_2018_837_MOESM1_ESM.docx (381 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 380 kb)

References

  1. Anderson, N. D., Craik, F. I. M., & Naveh-Benjamin, M. (1998). The attentional demands of encoding and retrieval younger and older adults: I. Evidence from divided attention costs. Psychology and Aging, 13, 405–423.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.13.3.405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arndt, J., & Reder, L. M. (2003). The effect of distinctive visual information on false recognition. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00518-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aschenbrenner, A. J., Balota, D. A., Gordon, B. A., Ratcliff, R., & Morris, J. C. (2016). A diffusion model analysis of episodic recognition in preclinical individuals with a family history for Alzheimer’s disease: The adult children. Neuropsychology, 3, 225–238.  https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000222 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Duchek, J. M., Adams, D., Roediger, H. L., III, McDermott, K. B., & Yerys, B. E. (1999). Veridical false memory in healthy older adults and in dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 16, 361–384.  https://doi.org/10.1080/026432999380834 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balota, D. A., Dolan, P. O., & Duchek, J. M. (2000). Memory changes in healthy older adults. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Handbook of memory (pp. 395–410). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Battig, W. F., & Montague, W. E. (1969). Category norms of verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 80, 1–46.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027577 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Benjamin, A. S. (2001). On the dual effects of repetition on false recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 941–947.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.4.941 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brainerd, C. J., & Reyna, V. F. (2002). Fuzzy-trace theory and false memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 164–169.  https://doi.org/10.1110/1467-8721.00192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Butler, K. M., McDaniel, M. A., McCabe, D. P., & Dornburg, C. C. (2010). The influence of distinctive processing manipulation on older adults’ false memory. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 17, 129–159.  https://doi.org/10.1080/13825580903029715 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coane, J. H., Huff, M. J., & Hutchison, K. A. (2016). The ironic effect of guessing: Increased false memory for mediated lists in younger and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 23, 282–303.Google Scholar
  11. Craik, F. I. M., & Byrd, M. (1982). Aging and cognitive deficits. In F. I. M. Craik & S. Trehub (Eds.), Aging and cognitive processes (pp. 191–211). New York, NY: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Craik, F. I. M, & McDowd, J. M. (1987). Age differences in recall and recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 474–479.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.13.3.474 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Deese, J. (1959). On the prediction of occurrence of particular verbal intrusions in immediate recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58, 17–22.  https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046671 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Erdfelder, E., Faul, F., & Buchner, A. (1996). GPOWER: A general power analysis program. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, 28, 1–11.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203630 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Foley, M. A., Wozniak, K. H., & Gillum, A. (2006). Imagination and false memory inductions: Investigating the role of process, content and source of imaginations. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1119–1141.  https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1265 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E., & McHugh, P. R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallo, D. A. (2004). Using recall to reduce false recognition: Diagnostic and disqualifying monitoring. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 120–128.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.1.120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gallo, D. A., Bell, D. M., Beier, J. S., & Schacter, D. L. (2006). Two types of recollection-based monitoring in younger and older adults: Recall-to-reject and the distinctiveness heuristic. Memory, 14, 720–741.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210600648506
  19. Gallo, D. A. (2006). Associative illusions of memory: False memory research in DRM and related tasks. New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  20. Gallo, D. A. (2010). False memories and fantastic beliefs: 15 years of the DRM illusion. Memory & Cognition, 38, 833–848.  https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.7.833 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gallo, D. A., Roediger, H. L., III, & McDermott, K. B. (2001). Associative false recognition occurs without strategic criterion shifts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 579–586.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196194 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Glanzer, M., & Adams, J. K. (1990). The mirror effect in recognition memory: Data and theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 5–16.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.16.1.5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gunter, R. W., Bodner, G. E., & Azad, T. (2007). Generation and mnemonic encoding induce a mirror effect in the DRM paradigm. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1083-1092.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193480 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hege, A. C. G., & Dodson, C. S. (2004). Why distinctive information reduces false memories: Evidence for both impoverished relational encoding and distinctiveness heuristic accounts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 787–795.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.4.787 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hockley, W. E., & Christi, C. (1996). Tests of encoding tradeoffs between item and associative information. Memory and Cognition, 24, 202–216.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200881
  26. Huff, M. J., Balota, D. A., & Hutchison, K. A. (2016). The costs and benefits of testing and guessing on recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 1559–1572.  https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000269 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Huff, M. J., & Bodner, G. E. (2013). When does memory monitoring succeed versus fail? Comparing item-specific and relational encoding in the DRM paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1246–1256.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031338 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Huff, M. J., & Bodner, G. E. (2014). All varieties of encoding variability are not created equal: Separating variable processing from variable tasks. Journal of Memory and Language, 73, 43–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.02.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huff, M. J., Bodner, G. E., & Fawcett, J. M. (2015). Effects of distinctive encoding on correct and false memory: A meta-analytic review of costs and benefits and their origins in the DRM paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 349–365.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0648-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Huff, M. J., & Hutchison, K. A. (2011). The effects of mediated word lists on false recall and false recognition. Memory & Cognition, 39, 941–953.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-011-0077-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hunt, R. R. (2006). The concept of distinctiveness in memory research. In R. R. Hunt & J. B. Worthen (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 3–25). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195169669.003.0001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.109.1.49
  33. Hunt, R. R., & Einstein, G. O. (1981). Relational and item-specific information in memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20, 497–514.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90138-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hunt, R. R., & Smith, R. E. (2014). How distinctive processing enhances hits and reduces false alarms. Journal of Memory and Language, 75, 45–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hunt, R. R., Smith, R. E., & Dunlap, K. R. (2011). How does distinctive processing reduce false recall? Journal of Memory and Language, 65, 378–389.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Israel, L., & Schacter, D. L. (1997). Pictorial encoding reduces false recognition of semantic associates. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 577–581.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214352 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kausler, D. H. (1994). Learning and memory in normal aging. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  38. Kelley, M. R., & Nairne, J. S. (2001). Von Restoff revisited: Isolation, generation, and memory for order. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 27, 54–66.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.54 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lampinen, J. M., Neuschatz, J. S., & Payne, D. G. (1999). Source attributions and false memories: A test of the demand characteristics account. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 130–135.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210820 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (1991). Detection theory: A user’s guide. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. McCabe, D. P., Presmanes, A. G., Robertson, C. L., & Smith, A. D. (2004). Item-specific processing reduces false memories. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1074–1079.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196739 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McCabe, D. P., & Smith, A. D. (2002). The effect of warnings on false memories in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 30, 1065–1077.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194324 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. McCabe, D. P., & Smith, A. D. (2006). The distinctiveness heuristic in false recognition and false recall. Memory, 14, 570–583.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210600624564 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McDaniel, M. A., Cahill, M. J., & Bugg, J. M. (2016). The curious case of orthographic distinctiveness: Disruption of categorical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 42, 104–113.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.109.1.49 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McDermott, K. B. (1996). The persistence of false memories in list recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 212–230.  https://doi.org/10.1006/j.jmla.1996.0012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Meade, M. L., & Roediger, H. L., III. (2006). The effect of forced recall on illusory recollection in younger and older adults. The American Journal of Psychology, 119, 433–462.  https://doi.org/10.2307/120445352 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Miller, M. B., & Wolford, G. L. (1999). Theoretical commentary: The role of criterion shifts in false memory. Psychological Review, 106, 398–405.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.2.398 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Neuschatz, J. S., Payne, D. G., Lampinen, J. M., & Toglia, M. P. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of warnings and the phenomenological characteristics of false memories. Memory, 9, 53–71.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09658210042000076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Norman, K. A., & Schacter, D. L. (1997). False recognition in younger and older adults: Exploring the characteristics of illusory memories. Memory & Cognition, 25, 838–848.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211328 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Oliver, M. C., Bays, R. B., & Zabrucky, K. M. (2016). False memories and the DRM paradigm: Effects of imagery, list, and test type. Journal of General Psychology, 143, 33–48.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2015.1110558
  51. Pierce, B. H., Gallo, D. A., Weiss, J. A., & Schacter, D. L. (2005). The modality effect in false recognition: Evidence for test-based monitoring. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1407–1413.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193373 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59–108.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.2.59 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., & McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model analysis of the effects of aging on recognition memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 408–424.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2003.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ratcliff, R., Thapar, A., & McKoon, G. (2010). Individual differences, aging, and IQ in two-choice tasks. Cognitive Psychology, 60, 127–157.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.09.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Robin, F. (2010). Imagination and false memories. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 30, 407–424.  https://doi.org/10.2190/IC.30.4.e CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Roediger, H. L., III, Balota, D. A., & Watson, J. M. (2001). Spreading activation and arousal of false memories. In Roediger H. L. III, J. S. Nairne, I. Neath, & A. M. Surprenant (Eds.), The nature of remembering: Essays in honor of Robert G. Crowder (pp. 95–115). Washington, DC:: American Psychological Association.  https://doi.org/10.1037/10394-006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Roediger, H. L., III, & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 803–814.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.803 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schacter, D. L., Israel, L., & Racine, C. (1999). Suppressing false recognition in younger and older adults: The distinctiveness heuristic. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 1–24.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.261 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Schmidt, S. R. (1991). Can we have a distinctive theory of memory? Memory & Cognition, 19, 523–542.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197149 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Shipley, W. C. (1986). Shipley Institute of Living Scale. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
  61. Smith, R. E. (2006). Adult age differences in episodic memory: Item-specific, relational, and distinctive processing. In R. R. Hunt & J. B. Worthen (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 259–287). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195169669.003.0012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Smith, R. E., & Hunt, R. R. (1998). Presentation modality affects false memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 5, 710–715.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208850 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Smith, R. E., Hunt, R. R., & Dunlap, K. R. (2015). Why do pictures, but not visual words, reduce older adults’ false memories? Psychology and Aging, 30, 647–655.  https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Spieler, D. H., Balota, D. A., & Faust, M. E. (1996). Stroop performance in healthy younger and older adults and in individuals with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 461–479.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.22.2.461 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Thapar, A., & McDermott, K. B. (2001). False recall and false recognition induced by presentation of associated words: Effects of retention interval and level of processing. Memory & Cognition, 29, 424–432.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196393 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Thomas, A. K., & Sommers, M. S. (2005). Attention to item-specific processing eliminates age effects in false memories. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Toglia, M. P., Neuschatz, J. S., & Goodwin, K. A. (1999). Recall accuracy and illusory memories: When more is less. Memory, 7, 233–256.Google Scholar
  68. Tun, P. A., Wingfield, A., Rosen, M. J., & Blanchard, L. (1998). Response latencies for false memories: Gist-based processes in normal aging. Psychology and Aging, 13, 230–241.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.13.2.230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Van Overschelde, J. P., Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2004). Category norms: An updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 289–335.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2003.10.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. von Restorff, H. (1933). Uber die wirkung von bereichsbildungen in spurenfeld [About the effect of area formations in the trace field]. Psychologische Forschung, 18, 299–342.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409636 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Voss, A., & Voss, J. (2007). Fast-dm: A free program for efficient diffusion model analysis. Behavioral Research Methods, 39, 767–775.  https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192967 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Wahlheim, C. N., & Huff, M. J. (2015). Age differences in the focus of retrieval: Evidence from dual-list free recall. Psychology and Aging, 30, 768–780.  https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. White, C. N., Ratcliff, R., Vasey, M. W., & McKoon, G. (2010). Using diffusion models to understand clinical disorder. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 54, 39–52.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmp.2010.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Wixted, J. T., & Stretch, V. (2000). The case against a criterion shift account of false memory. Psychological Review, 107, 368–376.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295.X.107.2.368 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyThe University of Southern MississippiHattiesburgUSA
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyWashington University in St. LouisSt. LouisUSA

Personalised recommendations