Abstract
The ability of environmental-context (EC) familiarity, movement disruption, and the relative strength of memory cues to explain unreliable EC-dependent free-recall memory effects was examined in two experiments. Experiment 1 replicated Smith’s (1979, Experiment 1) results confirming that familiarity and disruption cannot account for free-recall EC-reinstatement effects. In Experiment 2, a level of processing manipulation varied stimulus item memory cue strengths, and memory was again assessed by free recall. Contrary to Murnane and Phelps’s (1995) and Dougal and Rotello’s (1999) recognition findings, an EC-reinstatement effect was observed with low, but not high, levels of processing. However, comparisons across the two experiments revealed inconsistencies with the relative cue strength hypothesis. Consequently, a variant of the relative cue strength hypothesis that highlights the role of retrieval processes was proposed to explain the interaction between the levels of processing and the EC-reinstatement effect.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bilodeau, I. M., &Schlosberg, H. (1951). Similarity in stimulating conditions as a variable in retroactive inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology,41, 199–204.
Bjork, R. A., &Richardson-Klavehn, A. (1989). On the puzzling relationship between environmental context and human memory. In C. Izawa (Ed.),Current issues in cognitive processes: The Tulane Floweree Symposium on Cognition (pp. 313–344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Craik, F. I. M. (1981). Encoding and retrieval effects in human memory: A partial review. In J. B. Long & A. D. Baddeley (Eds.),Attention and performance IX (pp. 383–402). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Craik, F. I. M., &Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,104, 268–294.
Dalton, P. (1993). The role of stimulus familiarity in context-dependent recognition.Memory & Cognition,21, 223–234.
Dougal, S., &Rotello, C. M. (1999). Context effects in recognition memory.American Journal of Psychology,112, 277–295.
Eich, J. M. (1985). Levels of processing, encoding specificity, elaboration and CHARM.Psychological Review,92, 1–38.
Engelkamp, J., Biegelmann, U., &McDaniel, M. A. (1998). Relational and item-specific information: Trade-off and redundancy.Memory,6, 307–333.
Fernandez, A., &Glenberg, A. M. (1985). Changing environmental context does not reliably affect memory.Memory & Cognition,13, 333–345.
Freeman, M. F., &Tukey, J. W. (1950). Transformation related to the angular and square root.Annals of Mathematical Statistics,21, 607–611.
Geiselman, R. E., &Bjork, R. A. (1980). Primary versus secondary rehearsal in imagined voices: Differential effects on recognition.Cognitive Psychology,12, 188–205.
Gillund, G., &Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall.Psychological Review,91, 1–67.
Glanzer, M., Adams, J. K., Iverson, G. I., &Kim, K. (1993). The regularities of recognition memory.Psychological Review,100, 546–567.
Godden, D. R., &Baddeley, A. D. (1975). Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater.British Journal of Psychology,66, 325–331.
Greenspoon, J., &Ranyard, R. (1957). Stimulus conditions and retroactive inhibition.Journal of Experimental Psychology,53, 55–59.
Haist, F., Shimamura, A. P., &Squire, L. R. (1992). On the relationship between recall and recognition memory.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18, 691–702.
Hautus, M. J. (1995). Corrections for extreme proportions and their biasing effects on estimated values of d’.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,27, 46–51.
Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgements of frequency and recognition in a multiple-trace memory model.Psychological Review,95, 528–551.
Humphreys, M. S., Bain, J. D., &Pike, R. (1989). Different ways to cue a coherent memory system: A theory for episodic, semantic and procedural tasks.Psychological Review,96, 208–233.
Hyde, T. S., &Jenkins, J. J. (1973). Recall for words as a function of semantic, graphic and syntactic orienting tasks.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 471–480.
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A process dissociation framework: Separating automatic from intentional uses of memory.Journal of Memory & Language,30, 513–541.
Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).A computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence: Brown University Press.
Lockhart, R. S., &Craik, F. I. M. (1990). Levels of processing: A retrospective commentary on a framework for memory research.Canadian Journal of Psychology,44, 87–112.
Macmillan, N. A., &Creelman, C. D. (1991).Detection theory: A user’s guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mandler, G. (1980). Recognizing: The judgement of previous occurrence.Psychological Review,87, 252–271.
McBride, D. M., &Dosher, B. A. (1999). Forgetting rates are comparable in conscious and automatic memory: A process-dissociation study.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 583–607.
Metcalfe, J., &Murdock, B. B. (1981). An encoding and retrieval model for single-trial free recall.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,16, 699–709.
Morton, J., Hammersley, R. H., &Bekerian, D. A. (1985). Headed records: A model for memory and its failures.Cognition,20, 1–23.
Murdock, B. B. (1993). TODAM2: A model for the storage and retrieval of item, associative and serial-order information.Psychological Review,100, 183–203.
Murnane, K., &Phelps, M. P. (1994). When does a different environmental context make a difference in recognition? A global activation model.Memory & Cognition,22, 584–590.
Murnane, K., &Phelps, M. P. (1995). Effects of changes in relative cue strength on context-dependent recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology,21, 158–172.
Nixon, S. J., &Kanak, N. J. (1985). A theoretical account of the effects of environmental context upon cognitive processes.Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society,23, 139–142.
Ratcliffe, R., Sheu, C. F., &Gronlund, S. D. (1992). Testing global memory models using ROC curves.Psychological Review,99, 518–535.
Roediger, H. L., III, &Guynn, M. J. (1996). Retrieval processes. In E. L. Bjork & R. A. Bjork (Eds.),Memory (Handbook of perception and cognition, 2nd ed., pp. 197–236). San Diego: Academic Press.
Rutherford, A. (1992). Alternatives to traditional analysis of covariance.British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology,45, 197–223.
Senn, S. J. (1989). Covariate imbalance and random allocation in clinical trials.Statistics in Medicine,8, 467–475.
Slamecka, N. J., &McElree, B. (1983). Normal forgetting of verbal lists as a function of their degree of learning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,9, 384–397.
Smith, S. M. (1979). Remembering in and out of context.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory,5, 460–471.
Smith, S. M. (1986). Environmental context-dependent recognition memory using a short-term memory task for input.Memory & Cognition,14, 347–354.
Smith, S. M. (1988). Environmental context-dependent memory. In G. M. Davies & D. M. Thompson (Eds.),Memory in context: Context in memory (pp. 13–34). Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
Smith, S. M., Glenberg, A. M., &Bjork, R. A. (1978). Environmental context and human memory.Memory & Cognition,6, 342–353.
Snodgrass, J. G., &Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics in measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,117, 34–50.
Strand, B. Z. (1970). Change of context and retroactive inhibition.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,9, 202–206.
Swets, J. A. (1986a). Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: Implications for theory and measurement of performance.Psychological Bulletin,99, 181–198.
Swets, J. A. (1986b). Indices of discrimination or diagnostic accuracy: Their ROCs and implied models.Psychological Bulletin,99, 100–117.
Swets, J. A., &Picket, R. M. (1982).Evaluation of diagnostic systems: Methods from signal detection theory. New York: Academic Press.
Tulving, E. (1983).Elements of episodic memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wickens, D. D. (1987). The dual meanings of context: Implications for research, theory and applications. In D. S. Gorfein & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.),Memory and learning: The Ebbinghaus Centennial Conference (pp. 135–152). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rutherford, A. The ability of familiarity, disruption, and the relative strength of nonenvironmental context cues to explain unreliable environmental-context-dependent memory effects in free recall. Memory & Cognition 28, 1419–1428 (2000). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211842
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211842