Abstract
A method for achieving process dissociation is described that places less emphasis on participants’ understanding and remembering interpretations of test cues than does the standard procedure. The proposed method, called theguided procedure, tests memory with a sequence of two prompts, one requesting word-stem recognition, followed by another for word-stem completion. Inclusion and exclusion conditions are produced by requesting completion of recognized stems to form previously presented or new words, respectively. Estimates of automatic and conscious memory produced by the standard and the guided procedures are compared in studies modeled after Toth, Reingold, and Jacoby (1994). Although not significantly different in many aspects, the outcomes differ in ways that may reflect less reliance on a generate—recognize strategy of participants tested with the guided procedure. Additional measures of memory available only with the guided procedure are presented.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bodner, G. E., Masson, M. E. J., &Caldwell, J. I. (2000). Evidence for a generate—recognize model of episodic influences on word-stem completion.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,26, 267–293.
Challis, B. H., &Brodbeck, D. R. (1992). Level of processing affects priming in word fragment completion.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 595–607.
Curran, T., &Hintzman, D. L. (1995). Violations of the independence assumption in process dissociation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21, 531–547.
Graf, P., &Komatsu, S. (1994). Process dissociation procedure: Handle with caution!European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,6, 113–129.
Hasher, L., &Zacks, R. T. (1979). Automatic and effortful processes in memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,108, 356–388.
Hertel, P. T., &Milan, S. (1994). Depressive deficits in recognition: Dissociation of recollection and familiarity.Journal of Abnormal Psychology,103, 736–742.
Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model.Psychological Review,95, 528–551.
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory & Language,30, 513–541.
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., Toth, J. P., &Yonelinas, A. P. (1993). Separating conscious and unconscious influences of memory: Measuring recollection.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,122, 139–154.
Johnston, W. A., Dark, V. J., &Jacoby, L. L. (1985). Perceptual fluency and recognition judgments.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 3–11.
Komatsu, S., Graf, P., &Uttl, B. (1995). Process dissociation procedure: Core assumptions fail, sometimes.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,6, 19–40.
LeCompte, D. C. (1995). Recollective experience in the revelation effect: Separating the contributions of recollection and familiarity.Memory & Cognition,23, 324–334.
Payne, K. B. (2001). Prejudice and perception: The role of automatic and controlled processes in misperceiving a weapon.Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,81, 181–192.
Reingold, E. M. (1995). Facilitation and interference in indirect/ implicit memory tests and in the process dissociation paradigm: The letter insertion and the letter deletion tasks.Consciousness & Cognition,4, 459–482.
Reingold, E. M., &Toth, J. P. (1996). Process dissociations versus task dissociations: A controversy in progress. In G. Underwood (Ed.),Implicit cognition (pp. 159–202). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richardson-Klavehn, A., Gardiner, J. M., &Java, R. I. (1994). Involuntary conscious memory and the method of opposition.Memory,2, 1–29.
Richardson-Klavehn, A., Gardiner, J. M., &Java, R. I. (1996). Memory: Task dissociations, process dissociations and dissociations of consciousness. In G. Underwood (Ed.),Implicit cognition (pp. 85–158). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richardson-Klavehn, A., Gardiner, J. M., &Ramponi, C. (2002). Level of processing and the process-dissociation procedure: Elusiveness of null effects on estimates of automatic retrieval.Memory,10, 349–364.
Roediger, H. L., III,Weldon, M. S., &Challis, B. H. (1989). Explaining dissociations between implicit and explicit measures of retention: A processing account. In H. L. Roediger III & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.),Varieties of memory and consciousness: Essays in honour of Endel Tulving (pp. 3–57). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schneider, W. (1990).Micro-Experimental Laboratory [Computer program]. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools.
Toth, J. P., Reingold, E. M., &Jacoby, L. L. (1994). Toward a redefinition of implicit memory: Process dissociations following elaborative processing and self-generation.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 290–303.
Yonelinas, A. P. (1994). Receiver-operating characteristics in recognition memory: Evidence for a dual-process model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 1342–1354.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Stern, L.D., McNaught-Davis, A.K. & Barker, T.R. Process dissociation using a guided procedure. Memory & Cognition 31, 641–655 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196104
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196104