The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Remembering remembering

Remembering remembering
Remembering remembering
We developed a laboratory analogue of the "forgot-it-all-along" effect that J. W. Schooler, M. Bendiksen, and Z. Ambadar (1997) proposed for cases of "recovered memories" in which individuals had forgotten episodes of talking about the abuse when they were supposedly amnestic for it. In Experiment 1, participants studied homographs with disambiguating context words; in Test 1 they received studied-or other-context words as cues; and in Test 2 they received studied-context cues and judged whether they had recalled each item during Test 1. In Experiment 2, retrieval cues were manipulated on both tests. In Experiment 3, both the studied-and other-context cues corresponded to the same meaning of each homograph. In Experiment 4, Test 1 was free recall, and studied-versus other-context cues were presented in Test 2. Participants more often forgot that they had previously recalled an item if they were cued to think of it differently on the two tests.
0278-7393
521-529
Arnold, Michelle M.
201113ad-16ee-47e7-a526-e2171150d39d
Lindsay, D. Stephen
9c9a44b6-f958-4d24-a80e-881648357cd8
Arnold, Michelle M.
201113ad-16ee-47e7-a526-e2171150d39d
Lindsay, D. Stephen
9c9a44b6-f958-4d24-a80e-881648357cd8

Arnold, Michelle M. and Lindsay, D. Stephen (2002) Remembering remembering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28 (3), 521-529.

Record type: Article

Abstract

We developed a laboratory analogue of the "forgot-it-all-along" effect that J. W. Schooler, M. Bendiksen, and Z. Ambadar (1997) proposed for cases of "recovered memories" in which individuals had forgotten episodes of talking about the abuse when they were supposedly amnestic for it. In Experiment 1, participants studied homographs with disambiguating context words; in Test 1 they received studied-or other-context words as cues; and in Test 2 they received studied-context cues and judged whether they had recalled each item during Test 1. In Experiment 2, retrieval cues were manipulated on both tests. In Experiment 3, both the studied-and other-context cues corresponded to the same meaning of each homograph. In Experiment 4, Test 1 was free recall, and studied-versus other-context cues were presented in Test 2. Participants more often forgot that they had previously recalled an item if they were cued to think of it differently on the two tests.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: 2002

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 40310
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/40310
ISSN: 0278-7393
PURE UUID: 64467297-89ce-4df8-9841-0b4997220436

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 05 Jul 2006
Last modified: 23 Apr 2020 16:44

Export record

Contributors

Author: Michelle M. Arnold
Author: D. Stephen Lindsay

University divisions

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×