Classifying implicit memory tests: Category association and anagram solution

https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90063-6Get rights and content

Abstract

In three experiments we investigated the nature of two implicit memory tests, free associating to category names and solving anagrams, by manipulating several variables during study. Additional implicit and explicit tests were included for comparison (word fragment completion and free recall). Primed category association responded like free recall by showing an advantage from generating words relative to reading them out of context, a levels of processing effect, and no effect of study modality (visual or auditory). The results of these variables on anagram solution were less clear cut, but tended to resemble the effects of primed word fragment completion (a modality effect, only a slight levels of processing effect, and little priming from pictures). Dissociations were obtained between explicit and implicit tests (e.g., free recall and primed fragment completion), but more importantly between implicit tests (e.g., primed fragment completion and category association). Because implicit tests can be dissociated, no single system underlies their performance; we emphasize instead their processing requirements to explain dissociations among tests.

References (50)

  • F.I.M. Craik

    On the transfer of information from temporary to permanent memory

    Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London

    (1983)
  • J.M. Gardiner et al.

    Specificity and generality of enhanced priming effects for self-generated study items

    American Journal of Psychology

    (1989)
  • M.S. Gazzaniga

    Organization in the human brain

    Science

    (1989)
  • P.C. Graf et al.

    Priming across modalities and priming across category levels: Extending the domain of preserved function in amnesia

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition

    (1985)
  • P.C. Graf et al.

    The information that amnesic patients do not forget

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition

    (1984)
  • S. Hamann

    Levels of processing effects in conceptually driven implicit tests

  • C.A.G. Hayman et al.

    Specific word transfer as a measure of processing in the word superiority paradigm

    Memory and Cognition

    (1989)
  • C.A.G. Hayman et al.

    Is priming in fregment completion based on a “traceless” memory system?

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

    (1989)
  • K.P. Hunt et al.

    Category-item frequency and category-name meaningfulness (m′): Taxonomic norms for 84 categories

    Psychonomic Monograph Supplements

    (1971)
  • L.L. Jacoby

    Memory observed and memory unobserved

  • L.L. Jacoby et al.

    On the relationship between autobiographical memory and perceptual learning

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

    (1981)
  • J.H. Kane et al.

    Depth of processing and interference effects in the learning and remembering of sentences

    Journal of Educational Psychology

    (1978)
  • K. Kirsner et al.

    Common and modality-specific processes in the mental lexicon

    Memory and Cognition

    (1983)
  • B.A. Levy et al.

    Reprocessing text: Indirect measures of word and message level processes

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition

    (1989)
  • S. Madigan

    Picture memory

  • Cited by (246)

    • Effects of Saccade Induced Retrieval Enhancement on conceptual and perceptual tests of explicit & implicit memory

      2018, Brain and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      Within this, a distinction has been made between conceptual (meaning-based) and perceptual (physical feature-based) processing (Jacoby, 1983; Roediger, 1990; Roediger et al., 1989; Weldon et al., 1995).1 This framework proposes that conceptual tests are influenced by the overlap in conceptual or semantic processing between study and test (e.g., Hamann, 1990; McBride & Shoudel, 2003; Ramponi, Richardson-Klavehn, & Gardiner, 2007; Srinivas & Roediger, 1990). Conversely, other tests are perceptual and are influenced by the overlap in surface or perceptual features between study and test (e.g., Blum & Yonelinas, 2001; Craik, Moscovitch, & McDowd, 1994; Roediger et al., 1992).

    • Implicit Versus Explicit Memory

      2017, Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference
    • Context-driven expectations about focus alternatives

      2015, Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      In addition to tracking discourse mention, listeners generate expectations about candidate alternatives based on properties such as category membership. The category effects observed in Experiment 2 may be explained in part by general processes of lexical retrieval and conceptual activation required in processing a sentence (Collins & Loftus, 1975; Cree et al., 1999; Srinivas & Roediger, 1990; Tversky & Hemenway, 1984), or by semantic priming (Yee & Sedivy, 2006). However, the situation-driven effects observed in Experiment 3 suggest that comprehenders also generate alternatives on the fly, which may involve novel ad hoc categories that are determined by the constraints or goals associated with a particular discourse (see Ballard & Hayhoe, 2009 for a discussion of task effects on gaze control; also Salverda, Brown, & Tanenhaus, 2011).

    • Implicit Memory

      2015, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences: Second Edition
    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Part of this research was supported by NIH Grant RO1 HD15054 and was presented at the 1988 meetings of the Psychonomic Society in Chicago, and the 1989 meetings of the Midwestern Psychological Association in Chicago.

    View full text