Abstract
The goal of the present study was to investigate the locus of the memory advantage for words that are generated according to a nonsemantic rule (letter transposition) over words that are presented intact (read words). In the first two experiments, a category instance generation task was used to test the possibility that the semantic features of generated words are more readily available than those of read words. This possibility was not supported. In Experiment 3, generation effects were found to depend on the level of meaningfulness of words in recall, but not in recognition. In Experiment 4, a between-list design eliminated the generation effect found in recall, but did not affect the generation effect in recognition. Taken together, these findings suggest that generating a target according to a letter transposition rule enhances the distinctiveness of the word along a nonsemantic dimension.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Bahrick, H P (1970) Two-phase model for prompted recall.Psychological Review,77, 215–222
Battig, W F., & Montague, W. E (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs,80(3, Pt. 2).
Begg, I, &Snider, A. (1987). The generation effect: Evidence for generahzed inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,13, 553–563
Craik, F. I. M, &Tulving, E (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology. General,104, 268–294.
Gardiner, J M., &,Hampton, J. A. (1985). Semantic memory and the generation effect: Some tests of the lexical activation hypothesis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 732–741.
Glisky, E. L., &Rabinowitz, J. C. (1985). Enhancing the generation effect through repetition of operations.Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 193–205.
Graf, P (1980). Two consequences of generating: Increased inter- and intra-word organization of sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 316–327.
Graf, P, &Mandler, G. (1984). Activation makes words more accessible, but not necessarily more retrievable.Journal of Verbal Learing & Verbal Behavior,23, 553–568.
Graf, P, Shimamura, A., &Squire, L (1985). Priming across modalities and priming across category levels: Extending the domain of preserved function in amnesia.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,11, 386–396.
Hirshman, E., &Bjork, R. A (1988). The generation effect. Support for a two-factory theory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 484–494.
Hochhaus, L. A. (1972). A table for the calculation of d’ andB.Psychological Bulletin,77, 375–376
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.
Jacoby, L. L. (1983). Remembering the data. Analyzing interactive processes in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavtor,22, 485–508.
Johns, E. E., &Swanson, L. G. (1988). The generation effect with nonwords.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,14, 180–190.
Kolers, P A., &Roediger, H L. III. (1984). Procedures of mind.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,23, 425–449.
Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of present-day Americaan English. Providence, RI Brown Umversity Press
McDaniel, M. A., Waddill, P. J., &Einstein, G. O. (1988). A contextual account of the generation effect: A three-factor theory.Journal of Memory & Language,27, 521–536.
McElroy, L. A. (1987) The generation effect with homographs: Evidence for postgeneration processing.Memory & Cognition,15, 148–153
Nairne, J S, Pusen, C, &Widner, R L., Jr. (1985) Representation in the mental lexicon: Implications for theories of the generation effect.Memory & Cognition,13, 183–191.
Nairne, J S., &Widner, R. L., Jr. (1987). Generation effects with nonwords: The role of test appropriateness.Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, & Cognition,13, 164–171
Noble, C. E. (1952). An analysis of meaning.Psychological Review,59, 421–430.
Paivio, A, Yuille, J. C., &Madigan, S. A. (1968). Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs,76(1, Pt. 2), 1–25.
Payne, D G., Neely, J. H., &Burns, D. J. (1986). The generation effect: Further tests of the lexical activation hypothesis.Memory & Cognition,14, 246–252.
Roediger, H. L. III, &Blaxton, T. A. (1987). Retrieval modes produce dissociations in memory for surface reformation. In D. S. Gorfein & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.),Memory and learning: The Ebbinghaus Centenmal Conference (pp. 349–380). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Rundus, D. (1973). Negative effects of using list items as recall cues.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 43–50.
Schacter, R L. (1987). Implicit memory History and current status.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,13, 501–518
Simpson G. B (1981). Meaning dominance and semantic context in the processing of lexical ambiguity.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,20, 120–136.
Slamecka, N J., &Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,4, 592–604.
Slamecka, N. J., &Kitsaiti, L. T. (1987) The generation effect as an artifact of selective displaced rehearsal.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 589–607.
Watkins, M. J., &Sechler, E. S. (1988). Generation effect with an incidental memorization procedure.Journal of Memory & Language,27, 537–544.
Whittlesea, B. W. A., &Cantwell, A. L. (1987). Enduring influence of the purpose of experiences: Encoding-retrieval interactions in word and pseudoword perception.Memory & Cognition,15, 465–472.
Wickens, D. D. (1987). The dual meaning of context Implications for research, theory, and applications. In D. S. Gorfein & R. R Hoffman (Eds.),Memory and learning: The Ebbinghaus centennial conference (pp. 135–152) Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This research was supported by a University of New South Wales postdoctoral fellowship to the author.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kinoshita, S. Generation enhances semantic processing? The role of distinctiveness in the generation effect. Memory & Cognition 17, 563–571 (1989). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197079
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197079