The isolation effect is a well-known memory phenomenon whose discovery is frequently attributed to von Restorff (1933). If all but one item of a list are similar on some dimension, memory for the different item will be enhanced. Modern theory of the isolation effect emphasizes perceptual salience and accompanying differential attention to the isolated item as necessary for enhanced memory. In fact, von Restorff, whose paper is not available in English, presented evidence that perceptual salience is not necessary for the isolation effect. She further argued that the difference between the isolated and surrounding items is not sufficient to produce isolation effects but must be considered in the context of similarity. Von Restorff’s reasoning and data have implications for the use of distinctiveness in contemporary memory research, where distinctiveness is sometimes defined as perceptual salience and sometimes as a theoretical process of discrimination. As a theoretical construct, distinctiveness is a useful description of the effects of differences even in the absence of perceptual salience, but distinctiveness must be used in conjunction with constructs referring to similarity to provide an adequate account of the isolation effect and probably any other memory phenomena.
Bartlett, F. C. (1932).Remembering. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bower, G. H., Thompson-Schill, S., &Tulving, E. (1994). Reducing retroactive interference: An interference analysis.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,20, 51–66.
Calkins, M. W. (1894). Association.Psychological Review,1, 476–483.
Calkins, M. W. (1896). Association: An essay analytic and experimental.Psychological Review Monograph Supplements,2.
Craik, F. I. M., &Jacoby, L. L. (1979). Elaboration and distinctiveness in episodic memory. In L. Nilsson (Ed.),Perspectives on memory research: Essays in honor of Uppsala University’s 500th anniversary (pp. 145–166). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Craik, F. I. M., &Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,11, 671–684.
Craik, F. I. M., &Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and retention of words in episodic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,104, 288–294.
Crowder, R. G. (1976).Principles of learning and memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Eysenck, M. W. (1979). Depth, elaboration, and distinctiveness. In L. S. Cermak & F. I.M. Craik (Eds.),Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 89–118). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Green, R. T. (1956). Surprise as a factor in the von Restorff effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology,52, 340–344.
Hall, J. F. (1971).Verbal learning and retention. New York: Lippincott.
Henle, M. (1986).1879 and all that: Essays in the history of psychology. New York: Columbia University Press.
Hilgard, E. R., &Bower, G. H. (1975).Theories of learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hunt, R. R., &Einstein, G. O. (1981). Relational and item-specific information in memory.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,20, 497–514.
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.
Hunt, R. R., &Kelly, R. E. S. (in press). Accessing the particular from the general: The power of distinctiveness in the context of organization.Memory & Cognition.
Hunt, R. R., &McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The enigma of organization and distinctiveness.Journal of Memory & Language,32, 421–445.
Hunt, R. R., &Mitchell, D. B. (1982). Independent effects of semantic and nonsemantic distinctiveness.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,8, 81–87.
Jenkins, W. O., &Postman, L. (1948). Isolation and spread of effect in serial learning.American Journal of Psychology,61, 214–221.
Jersild, A. (1929). Primacy, recency, frequency, and vividness.Journal of Experimental Psychology,12, 58–70.
Kausler, D. H. (1974).Psychology of verbal learning and memory. New York: Academic Press.
Koffka, K. (1935).Principles of Gestalt psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World.
Köhler, W., &von Restorff, H. (1935). Analyse von Vorgängen im Spurenfeld: Zur theorie der reproduktion.Psychologische Forschung,19, 56–112.
Lockhart, R. S., Craik, F. I. M., &Jacoby, L. L. (1976). Depth of processing, recognition, and recall. In J. Brown (Ed.),Recall and recognition (pp. 75–102). New York: Wiley.
Markman, A. B., &Gentner, D. (1993). Splitting the differences: A structural alignment view of similarity.Journal of Memory & Language,32, 517–535.
Medin, D. L., Goldstone, R. L., &Gentner, D. (1993). Respects for similarity.Psychological Review,100, 254–278.
Nelson, D. L. (1979). Remembering pictures and words: Appearance, significance, and name. In L. S. Cermak & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.),Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 45–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Osgood, C. E. (1953).Method and theory in experimental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pillsbury, W. B., &Raush, H. L. (1943). An extension of the Köhler-Restorff inhibition phenomenon.American Journal of Psychology,56, 293–298.
Rundus, D.(1971). Analysis of rehearsal processes in free recall.Journal of Experimental Psychology,89, 63–77.
Schmidt, S. R. (1991). Can we have a distinctive theory of memory?Memory & Cognition,19, 523–542.
Titchener, E. B. (1915).A textbook of psychology. New York: Macmillan.
Van Buskirk, W. L. (1932). An experimental study of vividness in learning and retention.Journal of Experimental Psychology,15, 563–573.
von Restorff, H. (1933). Über die Wirkung von Bereichsbildungen im Spurenfeld.Psychologische Forschung,18, 299–342.
Wallace, W. P. (1965). Review of the historical, empirical, and theoretical status of the von Restorff phenomenon.Psychological Bulletin,63, 410–424.
Watkins, O. C., &Watkins, M. J. (1975). Build up of proactive inhibition as a cue-overload effect.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,1, 442–452.
Woodworth, R. S. (1938).Experimental psychology. New York: Holt.
Woodworth, R. S., &Schlosberg, H. (1954).Experimental psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
This paper was presented to the meeting of the Psychonomic Society in Washington, D.C., November 1993, and the work was supported by a grant from NICHHD (HD 256587). Mark McDaniel, Steve Schmidt, and Endel Tulving provided helpful criticism of the manuscript. Special thanks to Henry L. Roediger for his encouragement on this project. Elizabeth Denny, Mary Henle, Cheryl Logan, Rebekah Kelly, and Christine Pivetta provided helpful comments on the work. The translation of von Restorff’s paper was done by Andrea Dorsch. The English translation of von Restorff’s paper can be accessed on the World Wide Web at http: //www.uncg.edu/~huntrr/vonrestorff.
About this article
Cite this article
Hunt, R.R. The subtlety of distinctiveness: What von Restorff really did. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2, 105–112 (1995). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03214414
- Serial Position
- Isolation Effect
- Nonsense Syllable
- Perceptual Salience
- Unrelated Item