The attribution of perceptual fluency in recognition memory: the role of expectation
Section snippets
Experiment 1
In Experiment 1, the fluency of test words was enhanced by using a repetition-priming procedure that was first demonstrated by Jacoby and Whitehouse (1989). In all previous work using this technique, the study and test episodes have been in the same sensory modality. In the present experiment, the effect of the prime on recognition will be compared when there is a perceptual match and a perceptual mismatch between the study and test episodes. The question at hand is whether the influence of
Experiment 2
In Experiment 1, participants who heard an auditory study list could discount the perceptual fluency for all of the test items because none of the targets had appeared in the same sensory modality on the recognition test. Therefore, the perceptual fluency of test items was irrelevant for all of the targets on the recognition test. This was not the case in Experiment 2, as the modality of the study list was manipulated within-subjects, with participants experiencing both an auditory and a visual
Experiment 3
The results so far suggest that the use of perceptual fluency as a heuristic in recognition memory depends on whether prior experience with the stimulus creates an expectation of more fluent perceptual processing upon reoccurrence. This idea was tested again in Experiment 3. However, in this experiment, there were no words presented during the study phase. Instead, a counterfeit study list was presented. Participants were told that they were participating in an experiment investigating the
General discussion
The purpose of this study was to determine whether the relevance of perceptual fluency as a sign of prior occurrence moderates its effect on recognition memory judgments. The results of three experiments show that it does. The results of Experiment 1 showed that when the study and test phases were both visual, the priming manipulation led to an increase in positive recognition responses. However, the priming manipulation had a significantly weaker effect on recognition responses when the study
Acknowledgements
A portion of the work was supported by Grant 1R03MH51470-01 from NIMH. We thank Vaibhav Bhatia, Laura Cavallari, Kristin Dust, Melissa Hardy, Tricia Leahy, and Kelly Vaccaro for assistance in testing participants.
References (31)
A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory
Journal of Memory and Language
(1991)Specificity of operations in sentence recognition
Cognitive Psychology
(1975)- et al.
Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
(1977) - et al.
Illusions of immediate memory: Evidence of an attributional bias for feelings of familiarity and perceptual quality
Journal of Memory and Language
(1990) - et al.
Why do strangers feel familiar, but friends don’t? A discrepancy-attribution account of feelings of familiarity
Acta-Psychologica
(1998) - et al.
Awareness, false recognition, and the familiarity-priming effect
Journal of Experimental Psychology: General
(1991) - et al.
Global matching models of recognition memory: How the models match the data
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review
(1996) - et al.
Cross-modality facilitation in tachistoscopic word recognition
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
(1983) Modality-specific repletion priming of auditory word recognition
Current Psychological Research
(1982)Classification and Cognition
(1994)