medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Neurología y Neurocirugía

2014, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Arch Neurocien 2014; 19 (1)

Reciprocal dissociations between subjective organization and hypermnesia

Solís MVM

Language: Spanish
References: 41
Page: 9-17
PDF size: 455.31 Kb.


ABSTRACT

This investigation examines the relationship between hypermnesia, significant retrieval increments across trials, and subjective organization (SO), which consists in adjacently grouping nominally unrelated stimuli. Davis and Dominowsky (1986) claim that SO promotes hypermnesia; however, we suggest that their results merely reflect a correlation, not a causal relationship between these phenomena. We used a four group between–participant design. Two groups studied words, the other two studied pictures. Our results suggests: (1) picture recall significantly higher than word recall; (2) consistent hypermnesia for pictures but not for words; however, (3) very high SO for words, but not for pictures. We obtained reciprocal dissociations between both phenomena. These results suggest that SO does not generate hypermnesia, these phenomena only correlate positively. We compare our results to those of Payne and Wenger (1992), who report equivalent SO among words, pictures and Socratic stimuli. Our results are interpreted with ARP, the alternative retrieval pathways hypothesis (v. gr., Solís–Macías, 1998, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c).


REFERENCES

  1. Tulving E. Subjective organization in free recall of “unrelated” words. Psychological Rev 1962;69:344-54.

  2. Tulving E. Intratrial and intertrial retention: notes towards a theor y of free recall verbal learning. Psychological Rev 1964;71:219-37.

  3. Alexander M P, Stuss DT, Fansabedian N. California verbal learning test: performance by patients with focal frontal and non-frontal lesions. Brain 2003;126(6), 1493-503.

  4. Bennett IJ, Golob EJ, Parker ES, Starr A. Memory evaluation in mild cognitive impairment using recall and recognition tests. J Clinical Experimental Neuropsychology 2006;28(8):1408-22.

  5. Bowler DM, Gaigg SB, Gardiner JM. Subjective organisation in the free recall learning of adults with Asperger’s syndrome. J Autism and Developmental Disorders, 2008;38(1), 104-13.

  6. Craik FIM, Winocur G, Palmer H, Binns MA, Edwards M, Bridges K, et al. Cognitive rehabilitation in the elderly: effects on memory. J Intern Neuropsychol Soc 2007;13:132-42.

  7. Koriat A, Pearlman-Avnion S, Ben-Zur H. The subjective organization of input and output events in memory. Psychol Res 1998;61(4):295-307.

  8. Miller GA. Human memory and the storage of information. I.R.E. Transactions Information Theory, IT-1956a;2:129-37.

  9. Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity to process information. Psychol Rev 1956b;63:81-97.

  10. Sternberg RJ, Tulving E. The measurement of subjective organization in free recall. Psychological Bull 1977;84,(3):539-56.

  11. Swartz KB, Himmanen SA. Shumaker RW. Response strategies in list learning by orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus × P. abelii). J Comparative Psychology 2007;121(3):260-9.

  12. Wilbur R, Silver R, Parente R. Subjective organization and positive transfer of performance with traumatically brain-injured adults. J Clin Experi Neuropsychol 2007;29(7):682-9.

  13. Davies SC, Dominowski RL. Hypermnesia and the organization of recall. Bull Psychonomic Society 1986;24(1):31-4.

  14. Roediger HL III, Payne DG. Hypermnesia: the role of repeated testing. J Experi Psychol: Learning, Memory, Cognition 1982;8:66-72.

  15. Arieh Y, Algom D. Processing picture-word stimuli: the contingent nature of picture and of word superiority. J Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, Cognition 2002;28(1):221-32.

  16. Bright P, Moss H, Tyler LK. Unitary vs multiple semantics: PET studies of word and picture processing. Brain and Language 2004;89(3), 417-32.

  17. Chertkow H. Using PET to disentangle the neuroanatomy of word and picture processing: Problems and methodological solutions. Brain Cognition 2001;46(1):9.

  18. Erdelyi M, Buschke H, Finkelstein S. Hypermnesia for Socratic stimuli: the growth of recall for an internally generated memory list abstracted from a series of riddles. Memory Cognition 1977;5(3):283-6.

  19. Erdelyi MH, Becker J. Hypermnesia for pictures: incremental memory for pictures but not words in multiple recall trials. Cognitive Psychology 1974;6:159-71.

  20. Jerger S, Damian MF, Spence MJ, Tye-Murray N, Abdi H. Developmental shifts in children’s sensitivity to visual speech: a new multimodal picture-word task. J Experimental Child Psychology 2009;102(1),40-59.

  21. Kosslyn SM, Pomerantz JR. Imagery, propositions, and the form of internal representations. Cognitive Psychol 1977;9, 52-76.

  22. Paivio AV. Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 1971.

  23. Petersen PT, Fox MI, Posner MA, Mintun ME, Raichle. Positron emission tomographic studies of the cortical anatomy of single word processing. In DA. Balota, EJ. Marsh (Eds.). Cognitive Psychology. New York: Psychology Press 2004;109-15.

  24. Shepard RN. Recognition memory for words, sentences, and pictures. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behavior 1967;6:156-63.

  25. Wilshire CE, Keall LM, Stuart EJ, O’Donnell DJ. Exploring the dynamics of aphasic word production using the picture-word interference task: a case study. Neuropsychologia 2007;45 (5):939-53.

  26. Einstein GO, Hunt RR. Levels of processing and organization: Additive effects of individual item and relational processing. J Experi Psychol: Human Learning and Memory 1980;6:588-98.

  27. Hunt RR, Einstein GO. Relational and item-specific information in memory. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behavior 1981;20:497- 514.

  28. Klein SB, Loftus J, Kihlstrom JF, Aseron R. Effects of item– specific and relational information on hypermnesic recall. J Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, Cognition 1989; 15:1192-7.

  29. Solís-Macías VM, Sánchez-Becerril F. En prensa. Información relacional y específica al estímulo y sus efectos sobre el recuerdo hipermnésico.

  30. Payne DG, Wenger MJ. Repeated recall of pictures, words, and riddles: increasing subjective organization is not sufficient for producing hypermnesia. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 1992;30(5):407-10.

  31. Haentjens G, d’Ydewalle G. Why do Socratic stimuli produce hypermnesia. Psychological Research 1987;49:169-72.

  32. Broadbent DE. Recall, Recognition, and Implicit Knowledge. In W. Kessen, A. Ortony, F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Essays in honor of George Mandler 1991;125-34. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  33. Broadbent DE, Broadbent MH. P. The Recognition of words which cannot be recalled. In P. M. A. Rabbitt & S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and Performance. New York: Academic Press 1975; (5):575-90.

  34. Brown J, Packham DW. The effect of prior recall on multiple recall recognition. J Experimental Psychology 1967;19,356- 61.

  35. Packham DW. Recognition of recalled and non-recalled items. Psychonomic Science 1968;11:291-2.

  36. Cooper AJR, Monk A. Learning for Recall and Learning for Recognition. In J. Brown (Ed.), New York: Wiley. Recall and Recognition 1976;131-56.

  37. Hogan RM, Kintsch W. Differential effects of study and test trials on long-term recognition and recall. J Verbal Learning Verbal Behavior 1971;10:562-7.

  38. Solís-Macías VM. Hypermnesia and fluctuations in the memory trace. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Oxford University. 1998.

  39. Solís-Macías VM. Funciones divergentes de recuerdo absoluto y acumulativo en el recuerdo episódico de pares asociados. Arch Neurocien 2008a;13(1):13-24.

  40. Solís-Macías VM. Hipermnesia en memoria episódica: recuerdo de pares asociados. Arch Neuroci 2008b;13(2):106-11.

  41. Solís-Macías VM. Repetir la información consolida la memoria e incrementa el nivel de recuerdo. Arch Neurocien 2008c;13(3), 170-7.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com