Wagenmakers E J, Zeelenberg R, Raaijmakers J G
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Psychon Bull Rev. 2000 Dec;7(4):662-7. doi: 10.3758/bf03213004.
The counter model for perceptual identification (Ratcliff & McKoon, 1997) differs from alternative views of word recognition in two important ways. First, it assumes that prior study of a word does not result in increased sensitivity but, rather, in bias. Second, the effects of word frequency and prior study are explained by different mechanisms. In the present experiment, study status and word frequency of target and foil were varied independently. Using a forced-choice task, we replicated the bias effect. However, we also found several interactions between frequency and prior study that are in direct conflict with the counter model. Most important, prior study of both alternatives resulted in an attenuation of the frequency effect and an increase in performance for low-frequency targets, but not for high-frequency targets. These findings suggest that the effects of frequency and prior study are not mediated by completely independent mechanisms.
