ArticlePublisher preview available

The Role of Attention for Context-Context Binding of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Features

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

There is converging evidence that the feeling of conscious recollection is usually accompanied by the bound retrieval of context features of the encoding episode (e.g., Meiser, Sattler, & Weiβer, 2008). Recently, however, important limiting conditions have been identified for the binding between context features in memory. For example, focusing on the semantics of the stimuli during encoding eliminates binding between perceptual context features (Meiser & Sattler, 2007). In the present research, we investigated the interplay of the focus of attention during encoding and stimulus characteristics in context-context binding. In particular, it has been suggested that context features differ in the degree to which they can be regarded as intrinsic or extrinsic to the items and that intrinsic features might be given more attentional processing during encoding than extrinsic features (e.g., Ecker, Zimmer, & Groh-Bordin, 2007a). In two experiments, we manipulated the "intrinsicality" of context features to investigate whether context-context binding might be limited to features that are in the focus of processing. Multinomial modeling analyses revealed that while context-context binding was eliminated for incidentally processed extrinsic context features (Experiment 1), it was preserved for intentionally processed extrinsic context features (Experiment 2).
RESEARCH REPORT
The Role of Attention for Context–Context Binding of Intrinsic and
Extrinsic Features
C. Dennis Boywitt and Thorsten Meiser
University of Mannheim
There is converging evidence that the feeling of conscious recollection is usually accompanied by the
bound retrieval of context features of the encoding episode (e.g., Meiser, Sattler, & Weier, 2008).
Recently, however, important limiting conditions have been identified for the binding between context
features in memory. For example, focusing on the semantics of the stimuli during encoding eliminates
binding between perceptual context features (Meiser & Sattler, 2007). In the present research, we
investigated the interplay of the focus of attention during encoding and stimulus characteristics in
context–context binding. In particular, it has been suggested that context features differ in the degree to
which they can be regarded as intrinsic or extrinsic to the items and that intrinsic features might be given
more attentional processing during encoding than extrinsic features (e.g., Ecker, Zimmer, & Groh-
Bordin, 2007a). In two experiments, we manipulated the “intrinsicality” of context features to investigate
whether context–context binding might be limited to features that are in the focus of processing.
Multinomial modeling analyses revealed that while context–context binding was eliminated for inciden-
tally processed extrinsic context features (Experiment 1), it was preserved for intentionally processed
extrinsic context features (Experiment 2).
Keywords: binding, source memory, remember/know, multinomial modeling
Episodic memories are inherently multidimensional, including a
variety of different perceptual context features such as background
color and shape or semantic features such as gender or academic
status of a speaker. In addition, recent research has shown that
episodic remembering goes together with a more integrated rein-
stantiation of the encoding episode (Meiser & Bröder, 2002;
Meiser, Sattler, & Weier, 2008). This integrated retrieval of
context details has been termed context–context binding, indicat-
ing that context features are bound to the item and to each other,
forming a holistic representation of the feature configuration of the
encoding episode (Meiser & Bröder, 2002).
In laboratory research, context–context binding is operational-
ized as stochastically dependent memory for context features.
1
Memory for context features is stochastically dependent if the
probability of retrieving one context feature is higher when the
other context feature is also retrieved than when the other context
feature is not retrieved. For instance, Meiser and Bröder (2002)
had participants study items that varied in position on the screen
(upper vs. lower) and font size (large vs. small). Subsequently,
participants’ memory was probed for their recognition of the items
and for the context features position and font size. In addition,
participants were queried about whether they vividly recollected
the prior presentation of the items (i.e., remembered [R]) or
whether recognition was accompanied by a feeling of familiarity
(i.e., knew [K]). Over a variety of studies, it has consistently been
demonstrated that for items that are consciously recollected, re-
trieval of context features is stochastically dependent, whereas for
items that are merely familiar, context features are retrieved inde-
pendently (Meiser & Bröder, 2002; Meiser et al., 2008). This result
is not due to higher overall levels of context memory in R re-
sponses than in K responses. Meiser et al. (2008) equated overall
context memory between R and K responses experimentally and
still observed context binding uniquely for R responses. This
particular result also raises questions concerning the interpretation
that R responses differ from K responses only in terms of overall
memory strength. Although R/K judgments have also been ex-
plained by models assuming only one underlying process (see
Wixted & Mickes, 2010, for a recent critique of the dual-process
interpretation of RK data), the qualitative difference in context–
context binding associated with R/K judgments cannot easily be
accommodated by unidimensional models.
In line with the conceptualization of episodic memories as rein-
stantiations of the encoding episode, the feeling of conscious recol-
lection is thus associated with bound context memory of the encoding
episode. Nonetheless, previous research has identified important lim-
1
Please note that the term context (or context–context) binding as used
here refers to the phenomenon of stochastic dependency in memory for two
context features, not to the binding of context features to the item.
This article was published Online First January 16, 2012.
C. Dennis Boywitt and Thorsten Meiser, Department of Psychology,
University of Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
We thank Beatrice G. Kuhlmann and Jan Rummel for very helpful
comments on an earlier version of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to C. Dennis
Boywitt, Department of Psychology, University of Mannheim, Mannheim
D-68131, Germany. E-mail: boywitt@uni-mannheim.de
Journal of Experimental Psychology: © 2012 American Psychological Association
Learning, Memory, and Cognition
2012, Vol. 38, No. 4, 1099–1107 0278-7393/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0026988
1099
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
... However, the mutual cuing hypothesis does not necessarily predict that item and features are bound into a unitary representation. There is an ongoing debate regarding the two accounts, with some results supporting mutual cuing (Boywitt & Meiser, 2012a, 2012bMeiser & Bröder, 2002; see also Balaban et al., 2019) and others supporting binding variability (Hicks & Starns, 2016;Starns & Hicks, 2005Vogt & Bröder, 2007). There is some evidence against an integrated binding structure in item-based representations as investigated in the source memory literature (Brady et al., 2013;Utochkin & Brady, 2020). ...
... We expected to replicate findings of a stochastic dependency of the retrieval of event elements (Hypothesis 1). In the source memory literature, a stochastic dependency of the retrieval of event elements has only been found for remember responses but not for know responses (Boywitt & Meiser, 2012a, 2012bMeiser & Bröder, 2002;Meiser et al., 2008;Starns & Hicks, 2005). Remember and know responses are subjective ratings of memory quality, intended to tap into feelings of conscious recollection and experienced familiarity, respectively. ...
... These factors may have contributed to an increased awareness regarding event structures in the experiments by Horner and Burgess (2014) and Horner et al. (2015) compared with Experiment 2. We also investigated how the binding of event elements differs regarding different recollection judgements. Whereas past research has only observed stochastic dependencies of the retrieval of event elements for remember responses but not for know responses (Boywitt & Meiser, 2012a, 2012bMeiser & Bröder, 2002;Meiser et al., 2008;Starns & Hicks, 2005), the present study did not find a consistent pattern across different recollection judgements, and dependencies were mostly unexpectedly negative. There is thus no support for Hypothesis 2. However, the remember-know paradigm (Gardiner, 1988) was usually used in the context of item-based representations and targets only specific cue elements. ...
Article
Full-text available
Experienced events consist of several elements which need to be bound together in memory to represent the event in a coherent manner. Given such bindings, the retrieval of one event element should be related to the successful retrieval of another element of the same event, thus leading to a stochastic dependency of the retrieval of event elements. The way in which bindings are structured is not yet clearly established and only few moderators of the binding of event elements have been identified. We present results from three experiments aiming to distinguish between an integrated binding structure, in which event elements are bound into a unitary representation, and a hierarchical binding structure, in which event elements are preferentially bound to specific types of elements. Experiments 2 and 3 were additionally designed to identify animacy, an entity's property of being alive, as a potential moderator of the binding of event elements. We also offer a new approach for modelling dependencies of the retrieval of event elements which mitigates some limitations of previous approaches. Consistent with previous literature we found dependencies of the retrieval of event elements if all of an events' constituent associations were shown. We found mixed evidence for integrated or hierarchical binding structures but found dependency of the retrieval of event elements to be sensitive to the presence of animacy in an event. The results suggest that binding structures may vary depending on moderators such as animacy or event structure awareness. Theoretical implications and directions for future research are discussed.
... To counteract possible floor effects in source memory, participants performed an orienting task during the learning phase that requires attending to the relevant source information but involves no rehearsal (i.e., indicating spatial positions using response keys during stimulus presentation on the screen; cf. Boywitt & Meiser, 2012). By preventing participants from using explicit rehearsal strategies for item-context and context-context associations, this approach creates a more realistic setting for examining everyday source monitoring. ...
... In contrast to ACSIM and CSIM, MPT models allow us to disentangle source memory from item memory and guessing (for reviews on this model class and a MPT tutorial, see Batchelder & Riefer, 1999;Erdfelder et al., 2009;Schmidt et al., 2023). MPT models have therefore gained considerable popularity in source memory research in general (e.g., Arnold et al., 2019;Bell et al., 2012Bell et al., , 2017Boywitt & Meiser, 2012;Kuhlmann et al., 2016;Nadarevic & Erdfelder, 2013, albeit with the exception of sleep-related research. ...
Article
Full-text available
For retention intervals of up to 12 h, the active systems consolidation hypothesis predicts that sleep compared to wakefulness strengthens the context binding of memories previously established during encoding. Sleep should thus improve source memory. By comparing retention intervals filled with natural night sleep versus daytime wakefulness, we tested this prediction in two online source-monitoring experiments using intentionally learned pictures as items and incidentally learned screen positions and frame colors as source dimensions. In Experiment 1, we examined source memory by varying the spatial position of pictures on the computer screen. Multinomial modeling analyses revealed a significant sleep benefit in source memory. In Experiment 2, we manipulated both the spatial position and the frame color of pictures orthogonally to investigate source memory for two different source dimensions at the same time, also allowing exploration of bound memory for both source dimensions. The sleep benefit on spatial source memory replicated. In contrast, no source memory sleep benefit was observed for either frame color or bound memory of both source dimensions, probably as a consequence of a floor effect in incidental encoding of color associations. In sum, the results of both experiments show that sleep within a 12-h retention interval improves source memory for spatial positions, supporting the prediction of the active systems consolidation hypothesis. However, additional research is required to clarify the impact of sleep on source memory for other context features and bound memories of multiple source dimensions.
... Stochastic dependence in context retrieval has been shown across several experiments (for a review, see Hicks & Starns, 2015). However, there is debate as to whether stochastic dependency in source retrieval reflects source-source binding, per se, or is merely an artifact of covariation in item-context binding for each source dimension (Arnold et al., 2019;Boywitt & Meiser, 2012a, 2012bHicks & Starns, 2015;Meiser & Bröder, 2002;Starns & Hicks, 2005. According to the mutual cuing hypothesis (Meiser & Bröder, 2002), the successful retrieval of one context feature serves as a cue for the other context feature, assuming both have been encoded into the same memory trace. ...
... In our study, participants were directed to focus on the items and their sources for a later memory test. This type of intentional focus on extrinsic sources has been shown to produce context-context binding in studies of multidimensional source memory (Boywitt & Meiser, 2012b). We found that the parameter of the MPT model corresponding to source-source binding was somewhat smaller for items encoded under DA than those encoded under FA, indicating that DA at encoding appears to disrupt sourcesource binding. ...
Article
Full-text available
Dividing attention (DA) between a memory task and a secondary task results in deficits in memory performance across a wide array of memory tasks, but these effects are larger when DA occurs at encoding than at retrieval. Although some research suggests the effects of DA are equal for item and associative memory, thereby suggesting that DA disrupts all components of an episode to the same extent, there have been relatively few studies directly examining the effects of DA on multiple features of the same episode. In addition, no studies have examined how DA may affect the stochastic dependency between multiple source dimensions of a given episode, which is central to theories of source memory, and episodic memory in general. Thus, in two experiments, we used a multidimensional source memory task-examining memory for items and multiple source features-and separately investigated how DA at encoding or at retrieval affects item memory, source memory, and joint source retrieval. DA was manipulated at encoding in Experiment 1 and at retrieval in Experiment 2. Whereas DA at encoding disrupted item memory, as well as source memory and source-source binding, though to a lesser extent, DA at retrieval did not affect any of these outcomes. Results are discussed in terms of levels of binding and the role of attention in encoding and retrieval of bounded episodic representations. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
... To allow for coherent event representations, these elements need to be bound together in memory. Such binding processes are associated with a stochastic dependency of the retrieval of event elements, such that the successful retrieval of an event element is associated with an increased likelihood of successful retrieval of subsequent event elements (Arnold et al., 2019;Boywitt & Meiser, 2012a, 2012bBröder, 2009;Horner & Burgess, 2013Horner et al., 2015;Joensen et al., 2020;Meiser & Bröder, 2002;Starns & Hicks, 2005. For example, when having experienced an event of a dog biting a cat and a sparrow, being able to successfully retrieve the dog or the association dog-cat should increase the chance of also successfully retrieving the other event elements (the cat and the sparrow) or the other possible associations (dog-sparrow and sparrow-cat). ...
Article
Full-text available
Representing events in episodic memory in a coherent manner requires that their constituent elements are bound together. So far, only few moderators of these binding processes have been identified. Here we investigate whether the presence of an agentic element in an event facilitates binding. The results from six experiments provided no evidence for a facilitating effect of agency on the binding of event elements. In addition, binding effects were only found when event elements were presented simultaneously, but not when they were presented sequentially pairwise, contrary to previous findings. The results suggest that the presence of an agentic element in an event does not or only to a very limited extent contribute to the formation of coherent memory representations and that additional processes may be required when binding event elements across temporarily divided encoding episodes. These findings add to a growing body of research regarding moderators and processes relevant for the binding of event elements in episodic memory. Explanations of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.
... Not all context memory tasks include orienting instructions and those that have (i.e., RiSE paradigm mentioned above) also found no differences in memory performance for ASD compared to TD 68 . Research has supported the idea that context binding may be limited to features naturally in the immediate focus of attention (i.e., intrinsic, stimulus-bound details), but when intentional contextual learning is employed, intrinsic and extrinsic features may be processed similarly 90 . An episodic event relies on the associative binding of a variety of details including specific item features, multiple items, spatial locations, temporal contexts, and self-referential information. ...
Article
Full-text available
Research on memory in autism spectrum disorder (ASD) finds increased difficulty encoding contextual associations in episodic memory and suggests executive dysfunction (e.g., selective attention, cognitive flexibility) and deficient metacognitive monitoring as potential contributing factors. Findings from our lab suggest that age-related impairments in selective attention contribute to those in context memory accuracy and older adults tended to show dependence in context memory accuracy between relevant and irrelevant context details (i.e., hyper-binding). Using an aging framework, we tested the effects of selective attention on context memory in a sample of 23 adults with ASD and 23 typically developed adults. Participants studied grayscale objects flanked by two types of contexts (color, scene) on opposing sides and were told to attend to only one object-context relationship, ignoring the other context. At test, participants made object and context recognition decisions and judgment of confidence decisions allowing for an evaluation of context memory performance, hyper-binding, and metacognitive performance for context judgments in a single task. Results showed that adults with ASD performed similarly to typically developed adults on all measures. These findings suggest that context memory performance is not always disrupted in adults with ASD, even when demands on selective attention are high. We discuss the need for continued research to evaluate episodic memory in a wider variety of adults with ASD.
... The results show that the difference in source memory between young and old people is smaller under the condition of unitization. Boywitt and Meiser (2012) found that under the condition of incidental attention, the source-source connection disappears in the extrinsic source features; and that this connection is preserved in intentional attention. ...
Article
Full-text available
The controversy in the relationship between item memory and source memory is a focus of episodic memory. Some studies show the trade-off between item memory and source memory, some show the consistency between them, and others show the independence between them. This review attempts to point out the connection-strength model, implying the different types and strengths of the important role of the item–source connections in the relationship between item memory and source memory, which is based on the same essence in the unified framework. The logic of the model is that when item memory and source memory share the same or relevant connection between item and source, they positively connect, or they are independently or negatively connected. This review integrates empirical evidence from the domains of cognition, cognitive neuroscience, and mathematical modeling to validate our hypothesis.
... We examined brain activity in MTL subregions during retrieval while encouraging unitization and/or relational encoding of two context details (color and size) with a single item in the same paradigm used in our behavioral study [1] with two changes. First, some data suggests that perceptually combining an item with a context detail may influence the contribution from familiarity and recollection to source recognition [26][27][28][29]. Therefore, to ensure that encoding was based on the intended semantic unitization manipulation and not perceptual characteristics of the stimuli, we removed all visual cues to the context (i.e., font size and background color) in the current studies. ...
Article
In retrieval of typical episodic memories, recollection leads to retrieval of context details whereas familiarity is only diagnostic for item memory. Unitization is an encoding strategy that allows context details to be processed as item features and therefore increases the involvement of familiarity-based recognition in retrieval of these context details. Relational encoding is a hippocampally-dependent process that stores items and contexts independently. Our previous study Tu and Diana [1] concluded that mixing unitized and non-unitized context details in the same episode reduced the contribution of familiarity to retrieval of any one detail. In the current study, we modified the paradigm by removing visual cues to the context details and the condition-specific blocking during test. Surprisingly, the behavioral data diverged from our 2016 study and indicated that the two manipulated context details in the modified paradigm were processed independently of one another. Neuroimaging data further revealed anterior hippocampal activation was associated with unitization of source information as compared to relational encoding. We also found the predicted increase in bilateral perirhinal cortex activation and decrease in parahippocampal cortex activation during retrieval of unitized color information when compared to relationally-encoded color information. We did not find that same predicted pattern of differences due to unitization of size information.
Article
Full-text available
When participants study items one-by-one and are directed to either remember or forget the respective item directly after its presentation, retention of to-be-forgotten items is regularly worse than of to-be-remembered items. We tested whether this directed forgetting effect which is regularly observed for item memory generalizes to source memory. In three experiments, participants studied items in two different source colors (N = 101) or at two different source locations (N = 64; N = 81). Sources were manipulated orthogonally to item type (remember vs. forget). At test, we asked participants to recognize all studied items and also to identify their source. We used a multinomial processing tree model to disentangle item memory, source memory, and guessing. In all three experiments, we replicated the directed forgetting effect in item memory. Source memory for to-be-forgotten items that were recognized despite the intention to forget, however, tended to be even better than source memory for to-be-remembered items that were recognized. These results suggest that the directed forgetting effect does not simply translate from item to source memory. Rather source memory seems to be disproportionally increased in to-be-forgotten items that are remembered.
Article
Remembering events coherently requires the binding of their constituting elements in episodic memory. Considering various demonstrations of social motives influencing cognition and preliminary evidence for a facilitating effect of social status on associative memory, we investigated whether social status influences binding processes in episodic memory. Participants were presented with events consisting of a person, an object, and a location, with the status of the person being manipulated. Two experiments yielded no evidence for a facilitating effect of social status on binding processes in episodic memory. These findings suggest that effects of social status are limited to simpler associative memories, as demonstrated by previous research.
Article
Full-text available
Remembering an experienced event in a coherent manner requires the binding of the event’s constituent elements. Such binding effects manifest as a stochastic dependency of the retrieval of event elements. Several approaches for modeling these dependencies have been proposed. We compare the contingency-based approach by Horner & Burgess ( Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142 (4), 1370–1383, 2013), related approaches using Yule’s Q (Yule, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 75 (6), 579–652, 1912) or an adjusted Yule’s Q (c.f. Horner & Burgess, Current Biology, 24 (9), 988–992, 2014), an approach based on item response theory (IRT, Schreiner et al., in press), and a nonparametric variant of the IRT-based approach. We present evidence from a simulation study comparing the five approaches regarding their empirical detection rates and susceptibility to different levels of memory performance, and from an empirical application. We found the IRT-based approach and its nonparametric variant to yield the highest power for detecting dependencies or differences in dependency between conditions. However, the nonparametric variant yielded increasing Type I error rates with increasing dependency in the data when testing for differences in dependency. We found the approaches based on Yule’s Q to yield biased estimates and to be strongly affected by memory performance. The other measures were unbiased given no dependency or differences in dependency but were also affected by memory performance if there was dependency in the data or if there were differences in dependency, but to a smaller extent. The results suggest that the IRT-based approach is best suited for measuring binding effects. Further considerations when deciding for a modeling approach are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
Source memory may comprise recollection of multiple features of the encoding episode. To analyze the simultaneous representation and retrieval of those multiple features, a multinomial memory model is presented that measures memory for crossed dimensions of source information. The first experiment investigated the validity of the new model. The model showed an excellent statistical fit to empirical data, and the parameters of multidimensional source memory were sensitive to manipulations of source similarity on distinct dimensions. The second experiment used the model to test the hypothesis that source memory for individual context attributes is stochastically related in the case of conscious recollection but independent in the case of familiarity-based recognition judgments. The prediction was supported by the introduction of a “remember”–“know” distinction in a multidimensional source memory test.
Article
Full-text available
A multinomial model of the "Who said what?" paradigm (S. E. Taylor, S. T. Fiske, N. J. Etcoff, & A. J. Ruderman, 1978) explains the pattern of participants' assignment errors by means of the joint operation of several processes. Specifically, memory for discussion statements, person memory, category memory, and 3 different guessing processes can be accommodated by the model. The model's ability to disentangle these processes is validated in a series of 5 experiments. The model thereby enables a more refined use of the "Who said what?" paradigm in testing theories of social categorization. This is demonstrated in a 6th experiment in which the validated model is applied to the study of the effects of cognitive load on categorization. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
Younger adults' "remember" judgments are accompanied by better memory for the source of an item than "know" judgments. Furthermore, remember judgments are not merely associated with better memory for individual source features but also with bound memory for multiple source features. However, older adults, independent of their subjective memory experience, are generally less likely to "bind" source features to an item and to each other in memory (i.e., the associative deficit). In two experiments, we tested whether memory for perceptual source features, independently or bound, is also the basis for older adults' remember responses or if their associative deficit leads them to base their responses on other types of information. The results suggest that retrieval of perceptual source features, individually or bound, forms the basis for younger but not for older adults' remember judgments even when the overall level of memory for perceptual sources is closely equated (Experiment 1) and when attention is explicitly directed to the source information at encoding (Experiment 2).
Article
Full-text available
The dual-process theory of recognition memory holds that recognition decisions can be based on recollection or familiarity, and the remember/know procedure is widely used to investigate those 2 processes. Dual-process theory in general and the remember/know procedure in particular have been challenged by an alternative strength-based interpretation based on signal-detection theory, which holds that remember judgments simply reflect stronger memories than do know judgments. Although supported by a considerable body of research, the signal-detection account is difficult to reconcile with G. Mandler's (1980) classic "butcher-on-the-bus" phenomenon (i.e., strong, familiarity-based recognition). In this article, a new signal-detection model is proposed that does not deny either the validity of dual-process theory or the possibility that remember/know judgments can-when used in the right way-help to distinguish between memories that are largely recollection based from those that are largely familiarity based. It does, however, agree with all prior signal-detection-based critiques of the remember/know procedure, which hold that, as it is ordinarily used, the procedure mainly distinguishes strong memories from weak memories (not recollection from familiarity).
Article
Full-text available
Multinomial processing tree (MPT) models are a family of stochastic models for psychology and related sciences that can be used to model observed categorical frequencies as a function of a sequence of latent states. For the analysis of such models, the present article presents a platform-independent computer program called multiTree, which simplifies the creation and the analysis of MPT models. This makes them more convenient to implement and analyze. Also, multiTree offers advanced modeling features. It provides estimates of the parameters and their variability, goodness-of-fit statistics, hypothesis testing, checks for identifiability, parametric and nonparametric bootstrapping, and power analyses. In this article, the algorithms underlying multiTree are given, and a user guide is provided. The multiTree program can be downloaded from http://psycho3.uni-mannheim.de/multitree.
Article
Full-text available
The authors reviewed the evidence of age differences in episodic memory for content of a message and the context associated with it. Specifically, the authors tested a hypothesis that memory for context is more vulnerable to aging than memory for content. In addition, the authors inquired whether effort at encoding and retrieval and type of stimulus material moderate the magnitude of age differences in both memory domains. The results of the meta-analysis of 46 studies confirmed the main hypothesis: Age differences in context memory are reliably greater than those in memory for content. Tasks that required greater effort during retrieval yielded larger age differences in content but not in context memory. The greatest magnitude of age differences in context memory was observed for those contextual features that were more likely to have been encoded independently from content. Possible mechanisms that may underlie age differences in context memory-attentional deficit, reduced working memory capacity, and failure of inhibitory processing are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
Source identification refers to memory for the origin of information. A consistent nomenclature is introduced for empirical measures of source identification which are then mathematically analyzed and evaluated. The ability of the measures to assess source identification independently of identification of an item as old or new depends on assumptions made about how inconsistencies between the item and source components of a source-monitoring task may be resolved. In most circumstances, the empirical measure that is used most often when source identification is measured by collapsing across pairs of sources (sometimes called "the identification-of-origin score") confounds item identification with source identification. Alternative empirical measures are identified that do not confound item and source identification in specified circumstances. None of the empirical measures examined provides a valid measure of source identification in all circumstances.
Article
Full-text available
A number of studies have reported age differences in memory for the source of information. S.A. Ferguson, S. Hashtroudi, and M.K. Johnson (1992) suggested that older adults do not efficiently use multiple distinctive characteristics of sources to distinguish between sources in source memory tasks. In the study reported here, participants heard information from 2 sources and later decided whether test items had been presented by Source A, by Source B, or were new. The distinctiveness of both perceptual and temporal characteristics of sources were independently manipulated. Older adults benefited more than young adults from multiple distinctive characteristics of sources. These results question the generality of S.A. Ferguson et al.'s hypothesis.
Article
Binding various features of an event together and maintaining these connections in memory is an essential component of episodic memories. Previous theories make contradictory predictions about the effects of emotional arousal on memory binding. In this article, I review evidence for both arousal-impaired and arousal-enhanced memory binding and explain these contradictory findings using an object-based framework. According to this framework, emotionally arousing objects attract attention that enhances binding of their constituent features. In contrast, the emotional arousal associated with one object either impairs or has no effect on the associations between that object and other distinct objects or background contextual information. After initial encoding, the attention-grabbing nature of emotionally arousing objects can lead to interference in working memory, making it more difficult to maintain other bound representations. These contrasting effects of arousal on memory binding should help predict which aspects of emotional memories are likely to be accurate and which aspects are likely to be misremembered. © 2007 Association for Psychological Science.
Article
Although generation typically enhances item memory, the effect is subject to a number of theoretically important limitations. One potential limitation concerns context memory but there has been debate about whether generation actually enhances or disrupts memory for contextual details. Five experiments assessed the effect of generation on context memory for perceptual attributes of the study stimulus (intrinsic context). The results indicate that despite enhancing item memory, generation disrupts memory for intrinsic context. This result generalized over different intrinsic details (print colour and font), different generation manipulations, and several methodological factors identified in earlier research as potential moderators of this negative generation effect. Despite the negative generation effect on intrinsic context, contextual details external to the target item (extrinsic context) are not disrupted. In a sixth experiment, a visually based generation task (letter transposition) enhanced context memory for the extrinsic detail of location. Coupled with earlier research, the results indicate that generation disrupts context memory for intrinsic details but either does not harm or enhances memory for extrinsic context.