Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Transfer-appropriate-processing accounts of memory emphasize the similarity of encoding and retrieval processes, and imply that experimental manipulations should have similar effects on encoding and retrieval. Exceptions to this expectation are thus of great interest, but extant exceptions (produced by studies using divided attention, alcohol, and benzodiazepines) are debatable, single dissociations between encoding and retrieval. The present experiments demonstrate a reversed dissociation, in which the same variable produced opposite effects when implemented at encoding and retrieval. At encoding, participants either solved anagrams of study words or read intact study words. At retrieval, participants likewise solved anagrams or read intact words prior to making recognition memory judgments. Compared with reading intact words, solving anagrams at encoding enhanced later recognition accuracy, whereas solving anagrams at test impaired accuracy. These results were obtained with old/new decisions (Experiment 1) and with confidence ratings (Experiment 2).

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Birnbaum

I.M.

Parker

E.S.

Hartley

J.T.

Noble

E.P.

(1978). Alcohol and memory: Retrieval processes. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 325–335.

Craik

F.I.M.

(1983). On the transfer of information from temporary to permanent memory. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 302, 341–359.

Craik

F.I.M.

Govoni

Naveh-Benjamin

Anderson

N.D.

(1996). The effects of divided attention on encoding and retrieval processes in human memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 159–180.

Curran

H.V.

(1991). Benzodiazepines, memory, and mood: A review. Psychopharmacology, 105, 1–8.

Glisky

E.L.

Rabinowitz

J.C.

(1985). Enhancing the generation effect through repetition of operations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 193–205.

Habib

Nyberg

Tulving

(2003). Hemispheric asymmetries of memory: The HERA model revisited. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 241–245.

Hicks

J.L.

Marsh

R.L.

(1998). A decrement-to-familiarity interpretation of the revelation effect from forced-choice tests of recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1105–1120.

Hicks

J.L.

Marsh

R.L.

(2000). Toward specifying the attentional demands of recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1483–1498.

Kolers

P.A.

Roediger

H.L.

(1984). Procedures of mind. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 425–449.

10.

Macmillan

N.A.

Creelman

C.D.

(1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. New York: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Morris

C.D.

Bransford

J.D.

Franks

J.J.

(1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.

12.

Mulligan

N.W.

Lozito

J.P.

(2004). Self-generation and memory. In Ross

(Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 45, pp. 175–214). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.

13.

Nairne

J.S.

(2002). The myth of the encoding-retrieval match. Memory, 10, 389–395.

14.

Naveh-Benjamin

Craik

F.I.M.

Gavrilescu

Anderson

N.D.

(2000). Asymmetry between encoding and retrieval processes: Evidence from divided attention and a calibration analysis. Memory & Cognition, 28, 965–976.

15.

Roediger

H.L.

(1990). Implicit memory: Retention without remembering. American Psychologist, 45, 1043–1056.

16.

Roediger

H.L.

Gallo

D.A.

Geraci

(2002). Processing approaches to cognition: The impetus from the levels-of-processing framework. Memory, 10, 319–332.

17.

Rohrer

Pashler

H.E.

(2003). Concurrent task effects on memory retrieval. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 96–103.

18.

Tulving

Thomson

D.M.

(1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352–373.

19.

Verde

M.F.

Rotello

C.M.

(2003). Does familiarity change in the revelation effect? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 739–746.

20.

Verde

M.F.

Rotello

C.M.

(2004). ROC curves show that the revelation effect is not a single phenomenon. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 560–566.

21.

Watkins

M.J.

Peynircioglu

Z.F.

(1990). The revelation effect: When disguising test items induces recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 1012–1020.

An Asymmetry Between Memory Encoding and Retrieval

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References