Diana Rachel A, Reder Lynne M
Department of Psychology, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA.
Mem Cognit. 2005 Oct;33(7):1289-302. doi: 10.3758/bf03193229.
Research on the list strength effect (LSE) has shown that learning some words on a list more strongly than others impairs memory for the weakly learned words when tested with a recall task. Norman (2002) demonstrated that the LSE also occurs within the recollection process of a recognition test. In this study, a mechanistic dual-process account of the LSE was tested that simultaneously makes predictions concerning additional sources of context in interference effects. In two experiments, we attempted to replicate Norman's (2002) findings and provide the basis for our modeling efforts. We found evidence for a recollection LSE in raw measures of responding, with memory performance also benefiting from reinstatement of perceptual characteristics at test. However, large differences in the hits between the lists were accompanied by small differences in false alarms, such that when d' is calculated, differences between the lists are not significant. We propose an account of the LSE whereby the actual effect of competition between items on the list is small, although present, and difficult to distinguish from large effects of bias due to the strength manipulations. We argue that our findings provide support for a mechanistic explanation of LSE that is based on competition of source activation and changes in the thresholds for responses.
对列表强度效应(LSE)的研究表明,在列表中学习某些单词比其他单词更强烈,在进行回忆任务测试时会损害对学习较弱单词的记忆。诺曼(2002)证明,LSE也出现在识别测试的回忆过程中。在本研究中,对LSE的一种机械双过程解释进行了测试,该解释同时对干扰效应中额外的背景来源做出预测。在两个实验中,我们试图复制诺曼(2002)的研究结果,并为我们的建模工作提供基础。我们在原始反应测量中发现了回忆LSE的证据,记忆表现也受益于测试时感知特征的恢复。然而,列表之间命中数的巨大差异伴随着误报的微小差异,因此当计算d'时,列表之间的差异并不显著。我们提出了一种对LSE的解释,即列表中项目之间竞争的实际效应很小,尽管存在,并且由于强度操纵而难以与偏差的大效应区分开来。我们认为,我们的研究结果为基于源激活竞争和反应阈值变化的LSE机械解释提供了支持。