Abstract
In three experiments, Ss responded to individual digits or letters according to whether or not each was in some prememorized list. There were either two possible responses (yes-no condition) or a single response (yes-only and no-only conditions). With memory sets of one, two, or four digits, RT was a linear function of memory set size. The slope of the function was least under the yes-only condition and greatest under the yes-no condition. Nonspecific practice had little effect on any of the slopes. With memory sets of 4, 8, or 12 letters, the slopes under the yes-only and yes-no conditions did not seem to differ, and practice with specific sets flattened the function considerably in both cases. Overall, the errors under the yes-no condition were mostly false alarms, those under the no-only condition mostly misses, and those under the yes-no condition were divided about equally. The results are interpreted partially in terms of a multiple-observations model of decision time.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Briggs, G. E., & Johnsen, A. M. On the nature of central processing in choice reactions. Memory & Cognition, 1972, 1, 91–100.
Chase, W. G., & Calfee, R. C. Modality and similarity effects in short-term recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 81,510–514.
Corballis, M. C. Access to memory: An analysis of recognition times. In P. M. A. Rabbitt and S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and performance V. New York: Academic Press, 1974, in press.
Corballis, M. C., & Miller, A. Scanning and decision processes in recognition memory. Jouxnal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 98,379–386.
Egeth, H., Maxcus, N., & Bevan, W. Target-set and response-set interaction: Implications for models of human information processing. Science, 1972, 176, 1447–1448.
Graboi, D. Searching for targets: The effects of specific practice. Perception & Psychophysics, 1971, 10,300–304.
Kristofferson, M. W. Effects of practice on character-classification performance. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1972a, 26, 54–60.
Kristofferson, M. W. Types and frequency of errors in visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 1972b, 11,325–328.
Kxistofferson, M. W. When item recognition and visual search functions are similar. Perception & Psychophysics, 1972c, 12, 379–384.
Kristofferson, M. W., Groen, M., & Kristofferson, A. B. When visual search functions look like item recognition functions. Perception & Psychophysics, 1973, 14,186–192.
Neisser, U., Novick, R., & Lazar, R. Searching for ten items simultaneously. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 1963, 17,955–961.
Newell, A. Production systems: Models of control structures. In W. G. Chase (Ed.),Visual information processing. New York: Academic Press, 1973.
Pike, R. Response latency models for signal detection. Psychological Review, 1973, 80, 53–68.
Ross, J. Extended practice within a single-character classification task. Perception & Psychophysics, 1970, 8,276–278.
Simpson, P. J. High-speed memory scanning: Stability and generality. Journal. of Experimental Psychology, 1972, 96, 239–246.
Sternberg, S. High-speed scanning in human memory. Science, 1966, 153,652–654.
Sternberg, S. The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders’ method. In W. G. Koster (Ed),Attention and performance II. Amsterdam: North Holland, 1969a.
Sternberg, S. Memozy-scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist, 1969b, 57, 421–457.
Yonas, A., & Pittenger, J. Searching for many targets: An analysis of speed and accuracy. Perception & Psychophysics, 1973, 13,513–516.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by Grant 9425-10 from the Defence Research Board of Canada.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Corballis, M.C., Roldan, C.E. & Zbrodoff, J. Response set effects in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition 2, 501–508 (1974). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196912
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196912