Abstract
Research on the list strength effect (LSE) has shown that learning some words on a list more strongly than others impairs memory for the weakly learned words when tested with a recall task. Norman (2002) demonstrated that the LSE also occurs within the recollection process of a recognition test. In this study, a mechanistic dual-process account of the LSE was tested that simultaneously makes predictions concerning additional sources of context in interference effects. In two experiments, we attempted to replicate Norman’s (2002) findings and provide the basis for our modeling efforts. We found evidence for a recollection LSE in raw measures of responding, with memory performance also benefiting from reinstatement of perceptual characteristics at test. However, large differences in the hits between the lists were accompanied by small differences in false alarms, such that whend' is calculated, differences between the lists are not significant. We propose an account of the LSE whereby the actual effect of competition between items on the list is small, although present, and difficult to distinguish from large effects of bias due to the strength manipulations. We argue that our findings provide support for a mechanistic explanation of LSE that is based on competition of source activation and changes in the thresholds for responses.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Anderson, J. R. (1981). Interference: The relationship between response latency and response accuracy.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,7, 326–343.
Cary, M., &Reder, L. M. (2003). A dual-process account of the listlength and strength-based mirror effects in recognition.Journal of Memory & Language,49, 231–248.
Chandler, C. C. (1991). How memory for an event is influenced by related events: Interference in modified recognition tests.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 115–125.
Chappell, M., &Humphreys, M. S. (1994). An auto-associative neural network for sparse representations: Analysis and application to models of recognition and cued recall.Psychological Review,101, 103–128.
Cohen, J., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., &Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers.Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,25, 257–271.
Dennis, S., &Humphreys, M. S. (2001). A context noise model of episodic word recognition.Psychological Review,108, 452–478.
Donaldson, W. (1996). The role of decision processes in remembering and knowing.Memory & Cognition,24, 523–533.
Gillund, G., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.Psychological Review,91, 1–67.
Gronlund, S. D., &Elam, L. E. (1994). List-length effect: Recognition accuracy and variance of underlying distributions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1355–1369.
Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model.Psychological Review,95, 528–551.
Hirshman, E. (1995). Decision processes in recognition memory: Criterion shifts and the list-strength paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 302–313.
Hirshman, E., &Master, S. (1997). Modeling the conscious correlates of recognition memory: Reflections on the remember—know paradigm.Memory & Cognition,25, 345–351.
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory & Language,30, 513–541.
Kim, K., &Glanzer, M. (1995). Intralist interference in recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 1096–1107.
McClelland, J. L., &Chappell, M. (1998). Familiarity breeds differentiation: A subjective-likelihood approach to the effects of experience in recognition memory.Psychological Review,105, 724–760.
Murdock, B. B. (1982). A theory for the storage and retrieval of item and associative information.Psychological Review,90, 316–338.
Murdock, B. B., &Kahana, M. J. (1993). Analysis of the list-strength effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,19, 689–697.
Murnane, K., Phelps, M. P., &Malmberg, K. (1999). Context- dependent recognition memory: The ICE theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,128, 403–415.
Murnane, K., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1991a). Interference and the representation of events in memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,17, 855–874.
Murnane, K., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1991b). Word repetitions in sentence recognition.Memory & Cognition,19, 119–130.
Norman, K. A. (1999). Differential effects of list strength on recollection and familiarity (Doctoral dissertation, Harvard University).Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. The Sciences & Engineering,60, 2974.
Norman, K. A. (2002). Differential effects of list strength on recollection and familiarity.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 1083–1094.
Norman, K. A., &O’Reilly, R. C. (2003). Modeling hippocampal and neocortical contributions to recognition memory: A complementarylearning-systems approach.Psychological Review,110, 611–646.
Ohrt, D. D., &Gronlund, S. D. (1999). List-length effect and continuous memory: Confounds and solutions. In C. Izawa (Ed.),On human memory: Evolution, progress, and reflections on the 30th anniversary of the Atkinson—Shiffrin model (pp. 105–125). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ratcliff, R., Clark, S. E., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1990). List-strength effect: I. Data and discussion.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 163–178.
Ratcliff, R., Sheu, C.-F., &Gronlund, S. D. (1992). Testing global memory models using ROC curves.Psychological Review,99, 518–535.
Reder, L. M., Donavos, D. K., &Erickson, M. A. (2002). Perceptual match effects in direct tests of memory: The role of contextual fan.Memory & Cognition,30, 312–323.
Reder, L. M., Nhouyvanisvong, A., Schunn, C. D., Ayers, M. S., Angstadt, P., &Hiraki, K. (2000). A mechanistic account of the mirror effect for word frequency: A computational model of remember— know judgments in a continuous recognition paradigm.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 294–320.
Rotello, C. M., Macmillan, N. A., &Reeder, J. A. (2004). Sum— difference theory of remembering and knowing: A two-dimensional signal detection model.Psychological Review,111, 588–616.
Shiffrin, R. M., Ratcliff, R., &Clark, S. (1990). The list-strength effect: II. Theoretical mechanisms.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 179–195.
Shiffrin, R. M., &Steyvers, M. (1997). A model for recognition memory: REM—retrieving effectively from memory.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 145–166.
Tulving, E. (1985). Memory and consciousness.Canadian Psychology,26, 1–12.
Tulving, E., &Hastie, R. (1972). Inhibition effects of intralist repetition in free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology,92, 297–304.
Willis, G. B., &Underwood, B. J. (1983). A lack of interference effects in recognition memory.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,21, 427–430.
Yonelinas, A. P. (1994). Receiver-operating characteristics in recognition memory: Evidence for a dual-process model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1341–1354.
Yonelinas, A. P., Hockley, W. E., &Murdock, B. B. (1992). Tests of the list-strength effect in recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 345–355.
Yonelinas, A. P., &Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Dissociations of processes in recognition memory: Effects of interference and of response speed.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology,48, 516–534.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This work was supported by Grant 2-R01-MH52808 from the National Institute of Mental Health to L.M.R. R.A.D. was supported by an NSF graduate fellowship and, in part, by the Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition at Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Pittsburgh.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Diana, R.A., Reder, L.M. The list strength effect: A contextual competition account. Memory & Cognition 33, 1289–1302 (2005). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193229
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193229