Recognition reaction time in long-term memory as a function of repetition, lag, and identification of positive and negative search sets

Donald Homa, Robert Fish

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Investigated, in 2 experiments, the effect of repeated presentations on recognition latency for positive and negative words. In Exp I, using 20 college students, an initial positive list of 20 words was memorized prior to recognition testing; during the testing sequence, positive and negative words were presented 4 times each, with certain words always appearing at predefined lags. In Exp II, with 20 college students unfamiliar with Exp I, a list of 10 negative words was memorized in addition to the 20 positive words. Results indicate that latencies for all stimulus types (positive, unlearned negative, and learned negative) decreased with repeated presentations, whereas the effect of different lags was unimportant. Error rates for unlearned negatives in both experiments were nearly zero; for positive and learned negative items, error rates systematically declined with repeated presentations and were independent of lag size. Results of the 2 experiments are interpreted as providing little support for the recognition model based on familiarity criteria developed in 1974 by R. C. Atkinson and J. F. Juola. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)71-80
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory
Volume1
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1975

Keywords

  • identification of positive &
  • lag &
  • negative search sets, recognition reaction time in long-term memory, college students
  • repetition &

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Recognition reaction time in long-term memory as a function of repetition, lag, and identification of positive and negative search sets'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this