Advertisement

List-strength effects in older adults in recognition and free recall

  • Lili SahakyanEmail author
Article
  • 48 Downloads

Abstract

The present investigation provides a novel extension of the retrieving effectively from memory (REM) model to examine free-recall and recognition memory in older adults to inform our understanding of age-related cognitive decline. When some items on a list are strengthened through distributed repetitions, memory for the nonstrengthened items on that list may become impaired depending on how memory is tested—a phenomenon known as the list-strength effect (LSE; e.g., Tulving & Hastie, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92, 297–304, 1972). When the strengthening operation involves distributed repetitions, LSE is robust in free recall, but it is reliably absent in recognition (Malmberg & Shiffrin, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31, 322–336, 2005; Ratcliff, Clark, & Shiffrin, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 16, 163–178, 1990). Two experiments investigated LSE in recall and recognition in older adults and young adults who encoded items with full or divided attention. Despite showing impaired recall and recognition, older adults showed patterns of LSEs across both experiments that were similar to young adults with full attention rather than young adults with divided attention. In recognition, there was a null LSE in older and young adults, but a positive LSE was observed under divided attention. In contrast, in free recall, there was a positive LSE in older and young adults, but a null LSE under divided attention. Collectively, the results suggest that older adults do not have impaired encoding of context information (evidenced by intact LSE in recall), and they do not have impaired differentiation of item representations (evidenced by the null LSE in recognition). Age-related impairment in both memory tasks can be accounted for by sparse encoding of item-based information.

Keywords

Aging List-strength effect Strength-based mirror effect Divided attention Free recall Recognition 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author thanks UNCG’s Adult Cognition Lab directed by Dr. Dayan Touron for the assistance with participant recruitment, and Dr. David Frank and Dr. Megan Jordano for their assistance with the data collection of older participants.

References

  1. Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp. 89–195). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Balota, D. A., Burgess, G. C., Cortese, M. J., & Adams, D. R. (2002). Memory for the infrequent in young, old, and early stage Alzheimer’s disease: Evidence for two processes in episodic recognition performance. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 199–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benjamin, A. (2010). Representational explanations of “process” dissociations in recognition: The dryad theory of aging and memory judgments. Psychological Review, 117, 1055–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buchler, N. E. G., & Reder, L. M. (2007). Modeling age-related memory deficits: A two-parameter solution. Psychology and Aging, 22, 104–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burke, D. M., & Light, L. L. (1981). Memory and aging: The role of the retrieval processes. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 513–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Castel, A. D., & Craik, F. I. M. (2003). The effects of aging and divided attention on memory for item and associative information. Psychology and Aging, 18, 873–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chalfonte, B. L., & Johnson, M. K. (1996). Feature memory and binding in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 24, 403–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cowan, N., Naveh-Benjamin, M., Kilb, A., & Saults, J. S. (2006). Life-span development of visual working memory: When is feature binding difficult? Developmental Psychology, 42, 1089–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cox, G. E., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2012). Criterion setting and the dynamics of recognition memory. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4, 135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Craik, F. I. M. (1977). Age differences in human memory. In J. E. Birren & K. W. Schaie (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of aging (pp. 384–420). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google Scholar
  11. Craik, F. I. M., Luo, L., & Sakuta, Y. (2010). Effects of aging and divided attention on memory for items and their contexts. Psychology and Aging, 25, 968–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Criss, A. H. (2006). The consequences of differentiation in episodic memory: Similarity and the strength based mirror effect. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 461–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Criss, A. H., Aue, W. R., & Kilic, A. (2014). Age and response bias: Evidence from the strength based mirror effect. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1910–1924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Criss, A. H., Malmberg, K. J. & Shiffrin, R. M. (2011). Output Interference in recognition memory testing. Journal of Memory and Language, 64, 316–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dennis, S., & Humphreys, M. S. (2001). A context noise model of episodic word recognition. Psychological Review, 108, 452–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., & Harman, H. H. (1976). Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton: Education Testing Service.Google Scholar
  17. Engle, R. W., Kane, M. J., & Tuholski, S. W. (1999). Individual differences in working memory capacity and what they tell us about controlled attention, general fluid intelligence, and functions of the prefrontal cortex. In A. Miyake & P. Shah (Eds.), Models of working memory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control (pp. 102–134). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fraundorf, S. H., Hourihan, K. L., Peters, R. A., & Benjamin, A. S. (2018). Aging and recognition memory: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin.Google Scholar
  19. Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1981). Free recall of complex pictures and abstract words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 575–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hasher, L., & Zacks, R. T. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 193–225). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hautus, M. J. (1995). Corrections for extreme proportion and their biasing effects on estimated values of d’. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 27, 46–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Healey, M. K., & Kahana, M. J. (2016). A four-component model of age-related memory change. Psychological Review, 123, 23–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. JASP Team (2016). JASP [Computer software] https://jasp-stats.org. Accessed 26 Nov 2016.
  24. Jacoby, L. L. (1999). Ironic effects of repetition: Measuring age-related differences in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 3–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Kelley, C. M., & Sahakyan, L. (2003). Memory, monitoring and control in attainment of memory accuracy. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 704–721.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kilb, A., & Naveh-Benjamin, M. (2007). Paying attention to binding: Further studies assessing the role of reduced attention resources in the associative deficit of older adults. Memory & Cognition, 35, 1162–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Li, S.-C., Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Lindenberger, U. (2005). Aging neuromodulation impairs associative binding: A neuro-computational account. Psychological Science, 16, 445–450.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Malmberg, K. J., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2005). The “one-shot” hypothesis for context storage. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 322–336.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Malmberg, K. J., Zeelenberg, R., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2004). Turning up the noise or turning down the volume? On the nature of the impairment of episodic recognition memory by midazolam. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 540–549.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. McClelland, J. L., & Chappell, M. (1998). Familiarity breeds differentiation: A subjective-likelihood approach to the effects of experience in recognition memory. Psychological Review, 105, 724–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Naveh-Benjamin, M. (2000). Adult age differences in memory performance: Tests of an associative deficit hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1170–1187.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Naveh-Benjamin, M., Guez, J., & Marom, M. (2003). The effects of divided attention at encoding on item and associative memory. Memory & Cognition, 31, 1021–1035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Naveh-Benjamin, M., Guez, J., & Shulman, S. (2004). Older adults’ associative deficit in episodic memory: Assessing the role of decline in attentional resources. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 1067-1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Naveh-Benjamin, M., Kilb, A., Maddox, G., Thomas, J., Fine, H., Chen, T., & Cowan, N. (2014). Older adults don't notice their names: A new twist to a classic attention task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 1540–1550.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Naveh-Benjamin, M., & Mayr, U. (2018). Age-related differences in associative memory: Empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Psychology and Aging, 33(1), 1–6.Google Scholar
  36. Nelson, A. B., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2013). The co-evolution of knowledge and event memory. Psychological Review, 120, 356–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Overman, A. A, McCormick-Huhn, J. M., Dennis, N. A., Salerno, J. M., & Giglio, A. P. (2018). Older adults’ associative memory is modified by manner of presentation at encoding and retrieval. Psychology and Aging , 33, 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Park, D. C., Lautenschlager, G., Hedden, T., Davidson, N. S., Smith, A. D., & Smith, P. K. (2002). Models of visuospatial and verbal memory across the adult life span. Psychology and Aging, 17, 299–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Raaijmakers, J. G. W., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1980). SAM: A theory of probabilistic search of associative memory. In G. H. Bower (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 14, pp. 207–262). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Ratcliff, R., Clark, S. E., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1990). List-strength effect: I. Data and discussion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 163–178.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Ratcliff, R., Sheu, C.-f., & Gronlund, S. D. (1992). Testing global memory models using ROC curves. Psychological Review, 99(3), 518–535.Google Scholar
  42. Sahakyan, L., Abushanab, B., Smith, J. R., & Gray, K. J. (2014). Individual differences in contextual storage: Evidence from the list-strength effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 873–881.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Sahakyan, L., & Malmberg, K. (2018). Divided attention during encoding causes separate memory traces to be encoded for repeated events. Journal of Memory and Language, 101, 153–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Salthouse, T. A. (1993). Speed mediation of adult age differences in cognition. Developmental Psychology, 29, 722–738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Shiffrin, R. M., Ratcliff, R., & Clark, S. E. (1990). List-strength effect: II. Theoretical mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 179–195.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Shiffrin, R. M., & Steyvers, M. (1997). A model for recognition memory: REM—Retrieving effectively from memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Smyth, A. C., & Naveh-Benjamin, M. (2016). Can DRYAD explain age-related associative memory deficits? Psychology and Aging, 31, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Spencer, W. D., & Raz, N. (1995). Differential effects of aging on memory for content and context: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 10, 527–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 31, 137–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stephens, J. D. W., & Overman, A. A. (2018). Modeling age differences in effects of pair repetition and proactive interference using a single parameter. Psychology and Aging, 33, 182–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tulving, E., & Hastie, R. (1972). Inhibition effects in intralist repetitions in free recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92, 297–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Verhaeghen, P. (2003). Aging and vocabulary score: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 18, 332–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wahlheim, C. N. (2014). Proactive effects of memory in young and older adults: The role of change recollection. Memory & Cognition, 42, 950–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. West, R. (1996). An application of prefrontal cortex function theory to cognitive aging. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 272–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wilson, J. H., & Criss, A. H. (2017). The list strength effect in cued recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 95, 78–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wixted, J. T., & Stretch, V. (2004). In defense of the signal-detection interpretation of remember/know judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 616–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yonelinas, A. P., Hockley, W. E., & Murdock, B. B. (1992). Tests of the list-strength effect in recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 345–355.Google Scholar
  58. Zachary, R. A. (1991). The manual of the Shipley Institute of Living Scale. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA
  2. 2.Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and TechnologyUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA

Personalised recommendations