A central tenet of current memory theories is the independence of data-driven and conceptually driven priming. Although these types of repetition priming have different functional properties, it has remained unclear whether they are independent and additive or interact with each other. Therefore, we orthogonally combined these priming types in two experiments requiring occupation judgments for celebrities, represented by their faces or names. In both experiments, the sum of the effects of separate data-driven priming and conceptually driven priming equaled the effect of the combination of these priming types. These findings demonstrate for the first time the independence of data-driven and conceptually driven priming and so confirm a central tenet of current memory theories. This independence may thus be an important element for the development of future overarching memory theories.
BeckerS.MoscovitchM.BehrmannM.JoordensS. (1997). Long-term semantic priming: A computational account and empirical evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 1059–1082.
2.
BlaxtonT. A. (1995). A process-based view of memory. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1, 112–114.
3.
BoehmS. G.KlostermannE. C.SommerW.PallerK. A. (2006). Dissociating perceptual and representation-based contributions to priming of face recognition. Consciousness and Cognition, 15, 163–174.
4.
BrownA. S.NeblettD. R.JonesT. C.MitchellD. B. (1991). Transfer of processing in repetition priming: Some inappropriate findings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 514–525.
5.
BruceV.ValentineT. (1985). Identity priming in the recognition of familiar faces. British Journal of Psychology, 76, 373–383.
6.
BruceV.ValentineT. (1986). Semantic priming of familiar faces. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Experimental Psychology, 38, 125–150.
7.
BruceV.YoungA. (1986). Understanding face recognition. British Journal of Psychology, 77, 305–327.
8.
BurtonA. M. (1998). A model of human face recognition. In GraingerJ.JacobsA. M. (Eds.), Localist connectionist approaches to human cognition (pp. 75–100). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
9.
BurtonA. M.KellyS. W.BruceV. (1998). Cross-domain repetition priming in person recognition. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 51A, 515–529.
10.
CaveC. B. (1997). Very long-lasting priming in picture naming. Psychological Science, 8, 322–325.
11.
EllisA. W.FludeB. M.YoungA.BurtonA. M. (1996). Two loci of repetition priming in the recognition of familiar faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 295–308.
12.
GabrieliJ. D. E. (1995). A systematic view of human memory processes. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 1, 115–118.
13.
HornerA. J.HensonR. N. A. (2009). Bindings between stimuli and multiple response codes dominate long-lag repetition priming in speeded classification tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 757–779.
14.
JacobyL. L. (1983). Remembering the data: Analyzing interactive processes in reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 485–508.
15.
JohnstonR. A.BarryC. (2006). Repetition priming of access to biographical information from faces. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 326–339.
16.
LappinJ. S.DischK. (1972). The latency operating characteristic: I. Effects of stimulus probability on choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92, 419–427.
17.
MorrisC. D.BransfordJ. D.FranksJ. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.
18.
MoscovitchM. (1992). Memory and working-with-memory: A component process model based on modules and central systems. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 257–267.
19.
MoscovitchM.VriezenE.Goshen-GottsteinY. (1993). Implicit tests of memory in patients with focal lesions or degenerative brain disorders. In BollerF.GrafmanJ. (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (Vol. 8, pp. 133–173). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
20.
Richardson-KlavehnA.BjorkR. A. (1988). Measures of memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 475–543.
21.
RoedigerH. L. (1990). Implicit memory. Retention without remembering. American Psychologist, 45, 1043–1056.
22.
RoedigerH. L.BlaxtonT. A. (1987). Effects of varying modality, surface features, and retention interval on priming in word-fragment completion. Memory & Cognition, 15, 379–388.
23.
RoedigerH. L.BucknerR. L.McDermottK. B. (1999). Components of processing. In FosterJ. K.JelicicM. (Eds.), Memory: Systems, process or function? (pp. 31–65). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
24.
RoedigerH. L.McDermottK. B. (1993). Implicit memory in normal human subjects. In BollerF.GrafmanJ. (Eds.), Handbook of neuropsychology (Vol. 8, pp. 63–131). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
25.
SchacterD. L.DobbinsI. G.SchnyerD. M. (2004). Specificity of priming: A cognitive neuroscience perspective. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 853–862.
26.
SquireL. R. (2004). Memory systems of the brain: A brief history and current perspective. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 82, 171–177.
27.
TenpennyP. L.ShobenE. J. (1992). Component processes and the utility of the conceptually-driven/data-driven distinction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 25–42.
28.
TulvingE. (1985). How many memory systems are there?American Psychologist, 40, 385–398.
29.
TulvingE.SchacterD. L. (1990). Priming and human memory systems. Science, 247, 301–306.
30.
VriezenE. R.MoscovitchM.BellosS. A. (1995). Priming effects in semantic classification tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21, 933–946.
