Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Although recognition of previously-studied words through a recognition memory test, in which the words are re-presented for a memory judgment, generally yields a greater response probability than the recall of previously studied words through a recall test, in which the words must be mentally retrieved from memory, Tulving found that this ...
Recency effects are seen more with auditory stimuli rather than verbal stimuli as auditory presentation seems to protect the end of lists from output interference. [25] 3. Transposition gradients Transposition gradients refer to the fact that recall tends to be better to recognize what an item is rather than the order of items in a sequence. 4.
For example, if intoxicated at the time the memory actually occurred, recall for details of the event is greater when recalling while intoxicated. Associated with state-dependency, recall can also depend on mood-dependency, in which recall is greater when the mood for when the memory occurred matches the mood during recall. [ 23 ]
Despite some doubting knowledge transfer across a topic when testing [35] with some studies showing contradictory evidence [36] suggesting recognition was better than recall, [37] inferential thinking has been supported [38] and the transfer of learning is at its strongest with application of theory to practice, inference questions, medical ...
State-dependent memory is one example of encoding specificity. If an individual encodes information while intoxicated he or she, ideally, should match that state when attempting to recall the encoded information. This type of state-dependent effect is strongest with free recall rather than when strong retrieval cues are present. [16]
Recall and recognition tests have different performance rates for different types of tests because they involve different levels of processing (LOP). [42] Recall tests require one to generate the information in its entirety, a deeper LOP, while recognition tests require one to determine if a stimulus has been previously presented, a shallow LOP ...
In his first experiment word recall per category was greater at 60 sec than 30 sec when taking the last input category out to prevent recency effect. [30] In his second experiment he changed the instructions, words used, and nature of the retention test, and showed with the recognition procedure, there was Output Interference but the effect was ...
Instead, the word being used to describe the collision seemed to better predict the estimate in speed rather than the speed itself. [ 4 ] The second experiment also showed participants videos of a car accident, but the phrasing of the follow-up questionnaire was critical in participant responses. 150 participants were randomly assigned to three ...