Seamon, J.G., Luo, C.R., Schwartz,
M.A., Jones, K.J., Lee, D.M., Jones, S.J. (2002). Repetition Can Have Similar
of Different Effects on Accurate and False Recognition. Journal of Memory
and
Language, 46, 323-340.
For several decades, researchers
have agreed that repetition increases retention. Currently, research focuses
on whether repetition has similar or different effects on false memory.
There are two general observations
that can be made:
-
Repetition of studied words leads to
a better performance on recognition and recall tests. (Benjamin, in press;
Brainerd et al., 1995; Kensinger & Schacter, 1999; McDermott, 1996;
Schacter et al., 1998; Shiffrin et al., 1995; Tussing & Greene, 1997,
1999)
-
The results of the effect of repetition
on false memory are less clear.
The goal of this paper is to figure
out why there are differences in the effect of repetition on fales memroy
and to explain this theoretically. Two positions are used representing
a single process theory (Underwood) and a dual process theory (Brainerd
and Reyna) to predict false recognition in our experiments. The two experiments
were conducted to test these predictions.
-
Implicit Activation Response Hypothesis
(Underwood) – Predicts that list repetition at study will monotonically
enhance both accurate recognition of studied words and false recognition
of critical words regqardless of exposure duration.
-
Fuzzy Trace theory (Brainerd
and Reyna) – Predicts that list repetition will increase accurate recognition,
the there will be an interaction of stimulus repetition and exposure duration
on false recognition.
Experiment 1:
18 DRM lists consisting of 15 words
were used. Each participant saw 9 lists (3 lists were presented 1 time,
3 were presented 5 times, and 3 were presented 10 times) Some participants
saw the words for 20 s and some saw the words for 2 s. The participants
were given a recognition test consisting of 72 words.
Check out Table 1 to see three main
findings:
-
Subjects recognized studied words more
frequently than nonstudied words.
-
Lengthening the exposure duration increased
accurate recognition and decreased false recognition.
-
List repetition monotonically increased
the accurate recognition of studied words from 1 to 10 presentations at
both exposure durations. List repetition also monotonically increased the
false recognition of critical word at the 20s conditions, BUT at the 2s
duration list repetition had a nonmonotonic effect on false recognition.
There was an increase in false recognition from 1 to 5 presentations, but
a decrease from 5 to 10 presentations.
The results from Experiment 1 are consistent
with the predictions made by the Fuzzy Trace Theory.
Experiement 2: This experiment
was conducted to test the reliability of the finding of experiment one
and to also examine the effect of an extreme level of list repetition on
accurate and false recognition.
All the materials were the same
as the first experiment. One thing was different. The DRM lists were presented
1 time, 5 or 25 times.
Check out Table 2 to see the findings:
-
Studied words were recognized more
frequently than nonstudied words (same as experiment 1)
-
The longer duration increased accurate
recognition, but had no systematic effect on false recognition (slightly
different than experiment 1)
-
List repetition monotonically increased
the accurate recognition of studied words at both exposure durations and
the false recognition at the 20 ms condition, but there was a nonmonotonic
effect on false recognition at the 2s condition (same as experiment 1)
Adding the 25 repetition did not change
accurate or false recognition. The results were really similar across the
two experiments.
Discussion
The results of this current paper
are discussed in terms of Underwood’s implicit activation approach and
other single process accounts, Fuzzy Trace Theory, and the Activation/Monitoring
Model.