• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

人们会记得不相关事件的时间接近程度吗?

Do people remember the temporal proximity of unrelated events?

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Oberlin College, Severance Laboratory, Oberlin, OH 44074, USA.

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 2010 Dec;38(8):1122-36. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.8.1122.

DOI:10.3758/MC.38.8.1122
PMID:21156875
Abstract

In the present study, we tested the ability to remember the temporal proximity of two unrelated events that had happened within 7 days of one another. In three experiments, 1,909 participants judged whether pairs of news events, ranging in age from 1 month to about 6 years, had occurred within a week of each other and, if not, how far apart they had occurred. Some event pairs were related, and others were unrelated. For unrelated event pairs, same-week and separation judgments were very poor. Accuracy was much greater for both kinds of judgments when the events were related. Participants often guessed the separation of unrelated event pairs, whereas they frequently deduced the separation or remembered the proximity of related event pairs. For both types of pairs, the participants reported using the strength of the memories or the general period in which the events had occurred.

摘要

在本研究中,我们测试了参与者记住在彼此相距 7 天内发生的两个不相关事件的时间接近程度的能力。在三个实验中,1909 名参与者判断新闻事件对的年龄从 1 个月到大约 6 年不等,它们是否在一周内彼此发生,以及如果没有,它们相隔多远。一些事件对是相关的,而另一些则是不相关的。对于不相关的事件对,同一周和分离判断的准确性非常差。当事件相关时,这两种判断的准确性都大大提高。当事件不相关时,参与者经常猜测事件之间的间隔,而当事件相关时,他们经常推断出事件之间的间隔或记住事件之间的接近程度。对于这两种类型的事件对,参与者都报告说他们使用了记忆的强度或事件发生的大致时间段。

相似文献

1
Do people remember the temporal proximity of unrelated events?人们会记得不相关事件的时间接近程度吗?
Mem Cognit. 2010 Dec;38(8):1122-36. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.8.1122.
2
Event memory: temporal-order judgments of personal life experiences.情景记忆:对个人生活经历的时间顺序判断。
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Mar;54(3):365-84. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.54.3.365.
3
The role of extralist associations in false remembering: a source misattribution account.额外列表关联在错误记忆中的作用:一种源错误归因解释。
Mem Cognit. 2009 Mar;37(2):130-42. doi: 10.3758/MC.37.2.130.
4
Perceived causality as a cue to temporal distance.将感知到的因果关系作为时间距离的线索。
Psychol Sci. 2005 Sep;16(9):673-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01594.x.
5
Remember and know judgments during recognition in chronic schizophrenia.慢性精神分裂症识别过程中的记忆与认知判断。
Schizophr Res. 2008 Mar;100(1-3):181-90. doi: 10.1016/j.schres.2007.09.021. Epub 2007 Oct 26.
6
Thinking about memories for everyday and shocking events: do people use ease-of-retrieval cues in memory judgments?思考日常事件和令人震惊事件的记忆:人们在记忆判断中会使用提取难易程度线索吗?
Mem Cognit. 2006 Jun;34(4):763-75. doi: 10.3758/bf03193424.
7
An overall decline both in recollection and familiarity in healthy aging.健康衰老时,回忆和熟悉感整体下降。
Psicothema. 2015;27(4):362-7. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2015.78.
8
The influence of making judgments of learning on memory performance: Positive, negative, or both?元记忆判断对记忆表现的影响:是积极的、消极的还是两者皆有?
Psychon Bull Rev. 2018 Dec;25(6):2356-2364. doi: 10.3758/s13423-018-1463-4.
9
Remember judgments and the constraint of direct experience.记住判断和直接经验的局限性。
Psychol Res. 2009 Sep;73(5):623-32. doi: 10.1007/s00426-008-0178-y. Epub 2008 Nov 6.
10
Different definitions of the nonrecollection-based response option(s) change how people use the "remember" response in the remember/know paradigm.不同的无法回忆反应选项的定义改变了人们在“记得/知道”范式中使用“记得”反应的方式。
Mem Cognit. 2019 Oct;47(7):1359-1374. doi: 10.3758/s13421-019-00938-0.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparison versus reminding.比较与提醒。
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2016;1(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s41235-016-0028-1. Epub 2016 Dec 12.

本文引用的文献

1
Reminiscence bump in autobiographical memory: unexplained by novelty, emotionality, valence, or importance of personal events.自传体记忆中的记忆隆起:无法用个人事件的新颖性、情感性、效价或重要性来解释。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2008;61(12):1847-60. doi: 10.1080/17470210701774242.
2
The role of reminding in long-term memory for temporal order.提醒在长期记忆中对时间顺序的作用。
Mem Cognit. 2007 Jan;35(1):66-72. doi: 10.3758/bf03195943.
3
Comment on "Potential role for adult neurogenesis in the encoding of time in new memories".关于《成体神经发生在新记忆时间编码中的潜在作用》的评论
Hippocampus. 2007;17(6):503-4. doi: 10.1002/hipo.20280.
4
Potential role for adult neurogenesis in the encoding of time in new memories.成年神经发生在新记忆时间编码中的潜在作用。
Nat Neurosci. 2006 Jun;9(6):723-7. doi: 10.1038/nn1707.
5
Memory for time: how people date events.对时间的记忆:人们如何确定事件的日期。
Mem Cognit. 2006 Jan;34(1):138-47. doi: 10.3758/bf03193393.
6
Remembering the news: modeling retention data from a study with 14,000 participants.记住这则新闻:对一项有14000名参与者的研究中的留存数据进行建模。
Mem Cognit. 2005 Jul;33(5):793-810. doi: 10.3758/bf03193075.
7
The reminiscence bump in autobiographical memory: effects of age, gender, education, and culture.自传体记忆中的记忆隆起:年龄、性别、教育和文化的影响。
Memory. 2005 Aug;13(6):658-68. doi: 10.1080/09658210444000322.
8
Judgment of frequency versus recognition confidence: repetition and recursive reminding.频率与识别置信度的判断:重复与递归提醒
Mem Cognit. 2004 Mar;32(2):336-50. doi: 10.3758/bf03196863.
9
Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about internet questionnaires.我们应该信任基于网络的研究吗?关于网络问卷的六个先入之见的比较分析。
Am Psychol. 2004 Feb-Mar;59(2):93-104. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.2.93.
10
The reliability of longitudinal surveys.纵向调查的可靠性。
Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1956 Jul;34(3):227-52.