Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Instability in memory phenomena: A common puzzle and a unifying explanation

  • Theoretical and Review Articles
  • Published:
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In mixed lists, stable free recall advantages are observed for encoding conditions that are unusual, bizarre, or attract extensive individual item elaboration relative to more common encoding conditions; but this recall advantage is often eliminated or reversed in pure lists. We attempt to explain this ubiquitous memory puzzle with an item-order account that assumes that (1) free recall of unrelated lists depends on order and item information; (2) unusual items attract greater individual item-processing but disrupt order encoding regardless of list composition; and (3) list composition determines differences in order encoding across unusual and common items. We show that the item-order account provides a unifying explanation of five memory phenomena for which the requisite data exist. The account also successfully anticipates pure-list reversals, in which the standard mixed-list recall pattern is obtained in pure, structured lists, a finding that competing accounts cannot handle. Extending the item-order account to other “established” recall phenomena may prove fruitful.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asch, S. E., & Ebenholtz, S. M. (1962). The process of free recall: Evidence for non-associative factors in acquisition and retention. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary & Applied, 54, 3–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, A. S. (2003). Predicting and postdicting the effects of word frequency on memory. Memory & Cognition, 31, 297–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D. J. (1990). The generation effect: A test between single and multifactor theories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 16, 1060–1067.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D. J. (1996). The item-order distinction and the generation effect: The importance of order information in long-term memory. American Journal of Psychology, 109, 567–580.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burns, D. J., Curti, E. T., & Lavin, J. C. (1993). The effects of generation on item and order retention in immediate and delayed recall. Memory & Cognition, 21, 846–852.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cermak, L. S. (1975). Improving your memory. Oxford: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R. L. (1981). On the generality of some memory laws. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 22, 267–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R. L. (1983). The effect of encoding variables on the free recall of words and action events. Memory & Cognition, 11, 575–582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collyer, S. C., Jonides, J., & Bevan, W. (1972). Images as memory aids: Is bizarreness helpful? American Journal of Psychology, 85, 31–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, S. D., & Wollen, K. A. (1981). Bizarreness and recall. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 18, 244–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craik, F. I., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deese, J. (1960). Frequency of usage and number of words in free-recall: The role of association. Psychological Reports, 7, 337–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLosh, E. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (1996). The role of order information in free recall: Application to the word-frequency effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1136–1146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewhurst, S. A., & Parry, L. A. (2000). Emotionality, distinctiveness, and recollective experience. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12, 541–555.

    Google Scholar 

  • deWinstanley, P. A., Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (1996). Generation effects and the lack thereof: The role of transfer-appropriate processing. Memory, 4, 31–48.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eichenbaum, H. (2004). Hippocampus: Cognitive processes and neural representations that underlie declarative memory. Neuron, 44, 109–120.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, G. O., & Hunt, R. R. (1980). Levels of processing and organization: Addictive effects of individual-item and relational processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 6, 588–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, G. O., & McDaniel, M. A. (1987). Distinctiveness and the mnemonic benefits of bizarre imagery. In M. A. McDaniel & M. Pressley (Eds.), Imagery and related mnemonic processes: Theories, individual differences, and applications (pp. 78–102). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelkamp, J., & Dehn, D. M. (2000). Item and order information in subject-performed tasks and experimenter-performed tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 671–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engelkamp, J., Jahn, P., & Seiler, K. H. (2003). The item-order hypothesis reconsidered: The role of order information in free recall. Psychological Research, 67, 280–290.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engelkamp, J., & Zimmer, H. D. (1997). Sensory factors in memory for subject-performed tasks. Acta Psychologica, 96, 43–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estes, W. K. (1972). An associative basis for coding and organization in memory. In A. W. Melton & E. Martin (Eds.), Coding processes in human memory (pp. 161–190). Washington, DC: Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuchs, A. H. (1969). Recall for order and content of serial word lists in short-term memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 82, 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1–67.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Golly-Häring, C., & Engelkamp, J. (2003). Categorical-relational and order-relational information in memory for subject-performed and experimenter-performed actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 29, 965–975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, R. L., Thapar, A., & Westerman, D. L. (1998). Effects of generation on memory for order. Journal of Memory & Language, 38, 255–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregg, V. H. (1976). Word frequency, recognition, and recall. In J. Brown (Ed.), Recall and recognition (pp. 183–216). Oxford: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregg, V. H., Montgomery, D. C., & Castaño, D. (1980). Recall of common and uncommon words from pure and mixed lists. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 19, 240–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronlund, S. D., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1986). Retrieval strategies in recall of natural categories and categorized lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 550–561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guynn, M. J., & McDaniel, M. A. (1999). Generate—sometimes recognize, sometimes not. Journal of Memory & Language, 41, 398–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hadley, C. B., & MacKay, D. G. (2006). Does emotion help or hinder immediate memory? Arousal versus priority-binding mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 32, 79–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. F. (1954). Learning as a function of word frequency. American Journal of Psychology, 67, 138–140.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hauck, P., Walsh, C., & Kroll, N. (1976). Visual imagery mnemonics: Common vs. bizarre mental images. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 160–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinrichs, J. V. (1970). A two-process memory strength theory for judgment of recency. Psychological Review, 77, 223–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshman, E., & Bjork, R. A. (1988). The generation effect: Support for a two-factor theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 484–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshman, E., & Mulligan, N. (1991). Perceptual interference improves explicit memory but does not enhance data-driven processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 507–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshman, E., Whelley, M. M., & Palij, M. (1989). An investigation of paradoxical memory effects. Journal of Memory & Language, 28, 594–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, R. R., & Einstein, G. O. (1981). Relational and item-specific information in memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 20, 497–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, R. R., & Elliott, J. M. (1980). The role of nonsemantic information in memory: Orthographic distinctiveness effects on retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 49–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, R. R., & McDaniel, M. A. (1993). The enigma of organization and distinctiveness. Journal of Memory & Language, 32, 421–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, R. R., & Worthen, J. (Eds.) (2006). Distinctiveness and memory. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 17, 649–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, L. L., & Hollingshead, A. (1990). Toward a generate/recognize model of performance on direct and indirect tests of memory. Journal of Memory & Language, 29, 433–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinsbourne, M., & George, J. (1974). The mechanism of the word-frequency effect on recognition memory. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 13, 63–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1970a). Learning, memory, and conceptual processes. Oxford: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1970b). Models for free recall and recognition. In D. A. Norman (Ed.), Models of human memory (pp. 331–373). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kintsch, W. (1978). More on recognition failure of recallable words: Implications for generation-recognition models. Psychological Review, 85, 470–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoedler, A. J., Hellwig, K. A., & Neath, I. (1999). The shift from recency to primacy with increasing delay. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 474–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C. L., & Estes, W. K. (1981). Item and order information in shortterm memory: Evidence for multilevel perturbation processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 7, 149–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky, S., & Murdock, B. B. (1989). Memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 96, 25–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linton, M. (1975). Memory for real-world events. In D. Norman & D. E. Rumelhart (Eds.), Explorations in cognition (pp. 376–404). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorayne, H., & Lucas, J. (1974). The memory book. New York: Stein & Day.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, G. (1969). Input variables and output strategies in free recall of categorized lists. American Journal of Psychology, 82, 531–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandler, G., & Dean, P. J. (1969). Seriation: Development of serial order in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 207–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, R. B., Cuddy, L. J., & Norton, J. M. (1979). Temporal contrast and the word frequency effect. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 33, 141–147.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, D. C., Einstein, G. O., & O’Halloran, C. M. (1989). Modulation of environmental reinstatement effects through encoding strategies. American Journal of Psychology, 102, 523–548.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., DeLosh, E. L., & Merritt, P. S. (2000). Order information and retrieval distinctiveness: Recall of common versus bizarre material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 1045–1056.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Dornburg, C. C., & Guynn, M. J. (2005). Disentangling encoding versus retrieval explanations of the bizarreness effect: Implications for distinctiveness. Memory & Cognition, 33, 270–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Einstein, G. O. (1986). Bizarre imagery as an effective memory aid: The importance of distinctiveness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 12, 54–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Einstein, G. O., De Losh, E. L., May, C. P., & Brady, P. (1995). The bizarreness effect: It’s not surprising, it’s complex. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 422–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., & Geraci, L. (2006). Encoding and retrieval processes in distinctiveness effects: Toward an integrative framework. In J. Worthen & R. R. Hunt (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 65–88). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, M. A., Waddill, P. J., & Einstein, G. O. (1988). A contextual account of the generation effect: A three-factor theory. Journal of Memory & Language, 27, 521–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merritt, P. S., DeLosh, E. L., & McDaniel, M. A. (2006). Effects of word frequency on individual-item and serial order retention: Tests of the order-encoding view. Memory & Cognition, 34, 1615–1627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merry, R. (1980). Image bizarreness in incidental learning. Psychological Reports, 46, 427–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W. (1996). The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on implicit memory, explicit memory, and memory for source. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 1067–1087.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W. (1999). The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on organization and order: Investigating the roles of item-specific and relational information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 25, 54–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W. (2000a). Perceptual interference and memory for order. Journal of Memory & Language, 43, 680–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W. (2000b). Perceptual interference at encoding enhances item-specific encoding and disrupts relational encoding: Evidence from multiple recall tests. Memory & Cognition, 28, 539–546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W. (2001). Word frequency and memory: Effects on absolute versus relative order memory and on item memory versus order memory. Memory & Cognition, 29, 977–985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W. (2002). The generation effect: Dissociating enhanced item memory and disrupted order memory. Memory & Cognition, 30, 850–861.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, N. W., & Lozito, J. P. (2007). Order information and free recall: Evaluating the item-order hypothesis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 732–751.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nairne, J. S. (1988). The mnemonic value of perceptual identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 14, 248–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nairne, J. S. (1992). The loss of positional certainty in long-term memory. Psychological Science, 3, 199–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nairne, J. S., & Kelley, M. R. (2004). Separating item and order information through process dissociation. Journal of Memory & Language, 50, 113–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nairne, J. S., Riegler, G. L., & Serra, M. (1991). Dissociative effects of generation on item and order retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 702–709.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neath, I., & Surprenant, A. M. (2002). Human memory: An introduction to research, data, and theory. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. L., & McEvoy, C. L. (2000). What is this thing called frequency? Memory & Cognition, 28, 509–522.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. L., & Xu, J. (1995). Effects of implicit memory on explicit recall: Set size and word-frequency effects. Psychological Research, 57, 203–214.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, D. L., & Zhang, N. (2000). The ties that bind what is known to the recall of what is new. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 604–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Postman, L. (1972). A pragmatic view of organization theory. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory (pp. 3–38). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pra Baldi, A., de Beni, R., Cornoldi, C., & Cavedon, A. (1985). Some conditions for the occurrence of the bizarreness effect in free recall. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 427–436.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ransdell, S. E., & Fischler, I. (1989). Effects of concreteness and task context on recall of prose among bilingual and monolingual speakers. Journal of Memory & Language, 28, 278–291.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, K. V., & Proctor, R. W. (1984). Study-phase processing and the word frequency effect in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 10, 386–394.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roediger, H. L., III (2008). Relativity of remembering: Why the laws of memory vanished. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 225–254.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, S. R. (1991). Can we have a distinctive theory of memory? Memory & Cognition, 19, 523–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, S. R. (1994). Effects of humor on sentence memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 953–967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senter, R. J., & Hoffman, R. R. (1976). Bizarreness as a nonessential variable in mnemonic imagery: A confirmation. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 7, 163–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serra, M., & Nairne, J. S. (1993). Design controversies and the generation effect: Support for an item-order hypothesis. Memory & Cognition, 21, 34–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slamecka, N. J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 4, 592–604.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slamecka, N. J., & Katsaiti, L. T. (1987). The generation effect as an artifact of selective displaced rehearsal. Journal of Memory & Language, 26, 589–607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soraci, S. A., Jr., Franks, J. J., Bransford, J. D., Chechile, R. A., Belli, R. F., Carr, M., & Carlin, M. (1994). Incongruous item generation effects: A multiple-cue perspective Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20, 67–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toglia, M. P., & Kimble, G. A. (1976). Recall and use of serial position information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 2, 431–445.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, E., & Madigan, S. A. (1970). Memory and verbal learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 21, 437–484.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tulving, E., & Pearlstone, Z. (1966). Availability versus accessibility of information in memory for words. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 5, 381–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tzeng, O. J. (1976). A precedence effect in the processing of verbal information. American Journal of Psychology, 89, 577–599.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tzeng, O. J., Lee, A. T., & Wetzel, C. D. (1979). Temporal coding in verbal information processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 5, 52–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J. (1969). Attributes of memory. Psychological Review, 76, 559–573.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J. (1983). Attributes of memory. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Underwood, B. J., & Schulz, R. W. (1960). Meaningfulness and verbal learning. Philadelphia: Lippincott.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, M. J., LeCompte, D. C., & Kim, K. (2000). Role of study strategy in recall of mixed lists of common and rare words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 239–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webber, S. M., & Marshall, P. H. (1978). Bizarreness effects in imagery as a function of processing level and delay. Journal of Mental Imagery, 2, 291–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. (2002). Memory for events after twenty years. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 16, 603–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollen, K. A., & Cox, S. (1981). Sentence cuing and the effectiveness of bizarre imagery. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning & Memory, 7, 386–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollen, K. A., & Margres, M. G. (1987). Bizarreness and the imagery multiprocess model. In M. A. McDaniel & M. Pressley (Eds.), Imagery and related mnemonic processes: Theories, individual differences, and applications (pp. 103–128). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollen, K. A., Weber, A., & Lowry, D. H. (1972). Bizarreness versus interaction of mental images as determinants of learning. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 518–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthen, J. B. (2006). Resolution of discrepant memory strengths: An explanation of the effects of bizarreness on memory. In R. R. Hunt & J. B. Worthen (Eds.), Distinctiveness and memory (pp. 133–156). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthen, J. B., Garcia-Rivas, G., Green, C. R., & Vidas, R. A. (2000). Tests of a cognitive-resource-allocation account of the bizarreness effect. Journal of General Psychology, 127, 117–144.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zaromb, F. M. (2007). The effects of effort after meaning on recall in within and between subjects designs. Unpublished master’s thesis, Washington University, St. Louis, MO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucco, G., Traversa, A. B., & Cornoldi, C. (1984). Il ruolo di dettagli non essenziali e della loro predicibilita contestuale nella rievocazione di nemi di figure [The role of nonessential details and of their contextual predictivity in the recall of names of pictures]. Ricerche di Psicologia, 4, 44–58.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Washington University, Campus Box 1125, One Brookings Dr., 63130, St. Louis, MO

    Mark A. McDaniel & Julie M. Bugg

Authors
  1. Mark A. McDaniel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julie M. Bugg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark A. McDaniel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McDaniel, M.A., Bugg, J.M. Instability in memory phenomena: A common puzzle and a unifying explanation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 15, 237–255 (2008). https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.237

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.2.237

Keywords

Search

Navigation