Abstract
Operations that improve the accuracy of associative recognition can do so in qualitatively different ways. Increasing repetitions and study time increases hit rates but has small effects on false alarm rates, and the specific patterns of false alarms are dependent on the stimuli (e.g., pairs of words, pseudowords, faces, or Chinese characters). In contrast, manipulating the type of stimuli that make up pairs produces a robust mirror effect: The hit rate is greater, and the false alarm rate is lower, for better recognized stimuli. To explain these findings, a model of single-item recognition is extended to associative recognition. Within this dual-process framework, the present results suggest that words are encoded more extensively than nonverbal stimuli and that recognition of frequently encountered stimuli (words and faces) is more likely to be based on recollection than is recognition of uncommon stimuli (pseudowords and Chinese characters).
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
AT&T Cambridge (1994).The Olivetti research database of faces [Electronic database]. Available at www.cam-orl.co.uk/facedatabase .html.
Atkinson, R. C., &Juola, J. F. (1974). Search and decision processes in recognition memory. In D. H. Krantz, R. C. Atkinson, R. D. Luce, & P. Suppes (Eds.),Contemporary developments in mathematical psychology: Vol. 1. Learning, memory, and thinking (pp. 243–293). San Francisco: Freeman.
Clark, S. E., &Gronlund, S. D. (1996). Global matching models of recognition memory: How the models match the data.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,3, 37–60.
Clark, S. E., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1992). Cuing effects and associative information in recognition memory.Memory & Cognition,20, 580–598.
Cleary, A. M., Curran, T., &Greene, R. L. (2001). Memory for detail in item versus associative recognition.Memory & Cognition,29, 413–423.
Criss, A. H., &Shiffrin, R. M. (2004). Pairs do not suffer interference from other types of pairs or single items in associative recognition.Memory & Cognition,32, 1284–1297.
Curran, T. (1999). The electrophysiology of incidental and intentional retrieval: ERP old/new effects in lexical decision and recognition memory.Neuropsychologia,37, 771–785.
Curran, T., Schacter, D. L., Norman, K. A., &Galluccio, L. (1997). False recognition after a right frontal lobe infarction: Memory for general and specific information.Neuropsychologia,35, 1035–1049.
Dennis, S., &Humphreys, M. S. (2001). A context noise model of episodic word recognition.Psychological Review,108, 452–478.
Diller, D. E., Nobel, P. A., &Shiffrin, R. M. (2001). An ARC-REM model for accuracy and response time in recognition and recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 414–435.
Dosher, B. A. (1984). Discriminating preexperimental (semantic) from learned (episodic) associations: A speed—accuracy study.Cognitive Psychology,16, 519–555.
Dunn, J. C. (2004). Remember—know: A matter of confidence.Psychological Review,111, 524–542.
Francis, W. N., &Kučera, H. (1982).Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Gardiner, J. M., &Java, R. I. (1990). Recollective experience in word and nonword recognition.Memory & Cognition,18, 23–30.
Glanzer, M., &Adams, J. K. (1985). The mirror effect in recognition memory.Memory & Cognition,13, 8–20.
Glanzer, M., &Adams, J. K. (1990). The mirror effect in recognition memory: Data and theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,16, 5–16.
Greene, R. L. (1996). Mirror effect in order and associative information: Role of response strategies.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,22, 687–695.
Greene, R. L. (2004). Recognition memory for pseudowords.Journal of Memory & Language,50, 259–267.
Gronlund, S. E., &Ratcliff, R. (1989). Time course of item and associative information: Implications of global memory models.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 846–858.
Healy, M. R., Light, L. L., &Chung, C. (2005). Dual-process models of associative recognition in young and older adults: Evidence from receiver operating characteristics.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,31, 768–788.
Hintzman, D. L. (1986). Schema abstraction in a multiple-trace memory model.Psychological Review,93, 411–428.
Hintzman, D. L., &Curran, T. (1994). Retrieval dynamics of recognition and frequency judgments: Evidence for separate processes of familiarity and recall.Journal of Memory & Language,33, 1–18.
Hintzman, D. L., Curran, T., &Oppy, B. (1992). Effects of similarity and repetition on memory: Registration without learning?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 667–680.
Hockley, W. E. (1992). Item versus associative information: Further comparisons of forgetting rates.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 1321–1330.
Hockley, W. E. (1994). Reflections of the mirror effect for item and associative recognition.Memory & Cognition,22, 713–722.
Jacoby, L. L. (1998). Invariance in automatic influences of memory: Toward a user’s guide for the process-dissociation procedure.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24, 3–26.
Jacoby, L. L., &Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,110, 306–340.
Kelley, R., &Wixted, J. T. (2001). On the nature of associative information in recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,27, 701–722.
Light, L. L., Patterson, M. M., Chung, C., &Healy, M. R. (2004). Effects of repetition and response deadline on associative recognition in young and older adults.Memory & Cognition,32, 1182–1193.
Malmberg, K. J., Holden, J. E., &Shiffrin, R. M. (2004). Modeling the effects of repetitions, similarity, and normative word frequency on old—new recognition and judgments of frequency.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 319–331.
Malmberg, K. J., &Murnane, K. (2002). List composition and the word-frequency effect for recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 616–630.
Malmberg, K. J., &Shiffrin, R. M. (2005). The “one-shot” hypothesis for context storage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,31, 322–336.
Malmberg, K. J., &Xu, J. (2007). On the flexibility and fallibility of associative memory.Memory & Cognition,35, 545–556.
Malmberg, K. J., Zeelenberg, R., &Shiffrin, R. M. (2004). Turning up the noise or turning down the volume? On the nature of the impairment of episodic recognition memory by midazolam.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,30, 540–549.
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.
Morrell, H. E., Gaitan, S., &Wixted, J. T. (2002). On the nature of the decision axis in signal-detection-based models of recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,28, 1095–1110.
Murdock, B. B. (1997). Context and mediators in a theory of distributed associative memory (TODAM2).Psychological Review,104, 839–862.
Naveh-Benjamin, M., Craik, F. I. M., &Ben-Shaul, L. (2002). Agerelated differences in cued recall: Effects of support at encoding and retrieval.Aging, Neuropsychology, & Cognition,9, 276–287.
Raaijmakers, J. G. W., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1980). SAM: A theory of probabilistic search of associative memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 14, pp. 207–262). New York: Academic Press.
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.
Rotello, C. M., &Heit, E. (1999). Two-process models of recognition memory: Evidence for recall-to-reject.Journal of Memory & Language,40, 432–453.
Rotello, C. M., &Heit, E. (2000). Associative recognition: A case of recall-to-reject processing.Memory & Cognition,28, 907–922.
Rotello, C. M., Macmillan, N. A., &Van Tassel, G. (2000). Recallto-reject in recognition: Evidence from ROC curves.Journal of Memory & Language,43, 67–88.
Sheffert, S. M., &Shiffrin, R. M. (2003). Auditory registration without learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,29, 10–21.
Shiffrin, R. M., Huber, D. E., &Marinelli, K. (1995). Effects of category length and strength on familiarity in recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 267–287.
Shiffrin, R. M., &Steyvers, M. (1997). A model for recognition memory: REM—retrieving effectively from memory.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 145–166.
Shiffrin, R. M., &Steyvers, M. (1998). The effectiveness of retrieval from memory. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (Eds.),Rational models of cognition (pp. 73–95). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wixted, J. T., &Stretch, V. (2004). In defense of the signal detection interpretation of remember/know judgments.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,11, 616–641.
Yonelinas, A. P. (1997). Recognition memory ROCs for item and associative information: The contribution of recollection and familiarity.Memory & Cognition,25, 747–763.
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002). The nature of recollection and familiarity: A review of 30 years of research.Journal of Memory & Language,46, 441–517.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
This research partially fulfilled the master’s degree requirements for J.X. at Iowa State University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Xu, J., Malmberg, K.J. Modeling the effects of verbal and nonverbal pair strength on associative recognition. Memory & Cognition 35, 526–544 (2007). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193292
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193292