Some memories are linked such that recalling one can trigger the retrieval of another. What determines which memories are linked? Some models predict that simply occurring close together in time is sufficient for links to form between memories. A competing theory suggests that temporal proximity is generally not sufficient, and existing evidence for such links is an artifact of using chainlike lists of items in artificial laboratory tasks. To test these competing accounts, we asked subjects to recall news stories that they had encountered over the past 2 years (Experiment 1) or 4 months (Experiment 2). In both experiments, subjects showed a strong bias to successively recall stories that appeared in the news within days of each other—even after accounting for the fact that stories that occur close in time tend to be semantically related. By moving beyond laboratory tasks, this research solidifies the foundation of contemporary memory theory.
AltmannE. M. (2003). Reconstructing the serial order of events: A case study of September 11, 2001. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 1067–1080.
2.
BrownG. D. A.NeathI.ChaterN. (2007). A temporal ratio model of memory. Psychological Review, 114, 539–576.
3.
Cortis MackC.CinelC.DaviesN.HardingM.WardG. (2017). Serial position, output order, and list length effects for words presented on smartphones over very long intervals. Journal of Memory and Language, 97, 61–80.
4.
Cortis MackC.DentK.KennettS.WardG. (2015). First things first: Similar list length and output order effects for verbal and nonverbal stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 1179–1214.
5.
DavelaarE. J.Goshen-GottsteinY.AshkenaziA.HaarmannH. J.UsherM. (2005). The demise of short-term memory revisited: Empirical and computational investigations of recency effects. Psychological Review, 112, 3–42. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.3
6.
EstesW. K. (1955). Statistical theory of distributional phenomena in learning. Psychological Review, 62, 369–377. doi:10.1037/h0046888
7.
FarrellS. (2012). Temporal clustering and sequencing in short-term memory and episodic memory. Psychological Review, 119, 223–271. doi:10.1037/a0027371
8.
FriedmanW. J. (2004). Time in autobiographical memory. Social Cognition, 22, 591–605.
9.
HealeyM. K. (2018). Temporal contiguity in incidentally encoded memories. Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 28–40.
10.
HealeyM. K.KahanaM. J. (2014). Is memory search governed by universal principles or idiosyncratic strategies?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 575–596. doi:10.1037/a0033715
11.
HealeyM. K.KahanaM. J. (in press). Contiguity in episodic memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.
12.
HintzmanD. L. (2011). Research strategy in the study of memory: Fads, fallacies, and the search for the “coordinates of truth.”Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 253–271.
13.
HintzmanD. L. (2016). Is memory organized by temporal contiguity?Memory & Cognition, 44, 365–375.
14.
HintzmanD. L.SummersJ. J.BlockR. A. (1975). Spacing judgments as an index of study-phase retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 104, 31–40.
15.
HowardM. W. (2004). Scaling behavior in the temporal context model. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 48, 230–238. doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2004.03.004
16.
HowardM. W.KahanaM. J. (2002a). A distributed representation of temporal context. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 46, 269–299.
17.
HowardM. W.KahanaM. J. (2002b). When does semantic similarity help episodic retrieval?Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 85–98.
18.
HowardM. W.ShankarK. H.AueW. R.CrissA. H. (2015). A distributed representation of internal time. Psychological Review, 122, 24–53. doi:10.1037/a0037840
19.
KahanaM. J. (1996). Associative retrieval processes in free recall. Memory & Cognition, 24, 103–109. doi:10.3758/BF03197276
20.
KimballD. R.SmithT. A.KahanaM. J. (2007). The fSAM model of false recall. Psychological Review, 114, 954–993. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.954
21.
KintschW. (1970). Models for free recall and recognition. In NormanD. A. (Ed.), Models of human memory (pp. 331–373). New York, NY: Academic Press.
22.
LandauerT. K.DumaisS. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104, 211–240.
23.
LehmanM.MalmbergK. J. (2013). A buffer model of memory encoding and temporal correlations in retrieval. Psychological Review, 120, 155–189. doi:10.1037/a0030851
24.
LewandowskyS.MurdockB. B. (1989). Memory for serial order. Psychological Review, 96, 25–57. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.96.1.25
25.
LohnasL. J.PolynS. M.KahanaM. J. (2015). Expanding the scope of memory search: Intralist and interlist effects in free recall. Psychological Review, 122, 337–363.
26.
McGeochJ. A. (1932). Forgetting and the law of disuse. Psychological Review, 39, 352–370. doi:10.1037/h0069819
27.
MoretonB. J.WardG. (2010). Time scale similarity and long-term memory for autobiographical events. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 510–515.
28.
MortonN. W.PolynS. M. (2016). A predictive framework for evaluating models of semantic organization in free recall. Journal of Memory and Language, 86, 119–140.
29.
NairneJ. S.CogdillM.LehmanM. (2017). Adaptive memory: Temporal, semantic, and rating-based clustering following survival processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 93, 304–314.
30.
PolynS. M.ErlikhmanG.KahanaM. J. (2011). Semantic cuing and the scale-insensitivity of recency and contiguity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37, 766–775.
31.
PolynS. M.NormanK. A.KahanaM. J. (2009). A context maintenance and retrieval model of organizational processes in free recall. Psychological Review, 116, 129–156. doi:10.1037/a0014420
32.
RaaijmakersJ. G. W.ShiffrinR. M. (1981). Search of associative memory. Psychological Review, 88, 93–134. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.88.2.93
33.
RoedigerH. L.IIICrowderR. G. (1976). A serial position effect in recall of United States presidents. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 8, 275–278.
34.
RubinD. C. (1982). On the retention function for autobiographical memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21, 21–38.
35.
RubinD. C.BaddeleyA. D. (1989). Telescoping is not time compression: A model of the dating of autobiographical events. Memory & Cognition, 17, 653–661. doi:10.3758/BF03202626
36.
SederbergP. B.MillerJ. F.HowardW. H.KahanaM. J. (2010). The temporal contiguity effect predicts episodic memory performance. Memory & Cognition, 38, 689–699. doi:10.3758/MC.38.6.689
37.
ShumM. S. (1998). The role of temporal landmarks in autobiographical memory processes. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 423–442.
38.
SolwayA.MurdockB. B.KahanaM. J. (2012). Positional and temporal clustering in serial order memory. Memory & Cognition, 40, 177–190.
39.
SteyversM.ShiffrinR. M.NelsonD. L. (2005). Word association spaces for predicting semantic similarity effects in episodic memory. In HealyA. F. (Ed.), Experimental cognitive psychology and its applications (pp. 237–249). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
40.
UnsworthN. (2008). Exploring the retrieval dynamics of delayed and final free recall: Further evidence for temporal-contextual search. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 223–236. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2008.04.002
41.
WhittenW. B.LeonardJ. M. (1981). Directed search through autobiographical memory. Memory & Cognition, 9, 566–579.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
