Encoding specificity revisited: The role of semantics

Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 55, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 231-243

  Hannon, Brenda ^a   Craik, Fergus I M ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CANADA; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; HUMAN; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; MEMORY; RECALL; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; CUES; HUMANS; MEMORY; MENTAL RECALL; ONTARIO; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS;

EID: 0035462077     PISSN: 11961961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/h0087369     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Baddeley, A. D. (1976). The psychology of memory. New York: Basic Books.
2. Bartling, C. A. (1992). List-subset effects and the Tulving-Wiseman function. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 30, 131-134.
3. Bartling, C. A., & Thompson, C. P. (1977). Encoding specificity: Retrieval asymmetry in the recognition failure paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3, 690-700.
4. Chaffin, K., & Herrmann, D. J. (1984). The similarity and diversity of semantic relations. Memory & Cognition, 12, 134-141.
5. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
6. Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268-294.
7. Duffy, S. A., Shinjo, M., & Myers, J. L. (1990). The effect of encoding task on memory for sentence pairs varying in causal relatedness. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 27-42.
8. Eich, J. E. (1980). The cue-dependent nature of state-dependent retention. Memory & Cognition, 8, 157-173.
9. Fernald, J. C. (Ed.) (1947). Funk and Wagnalls standard handbook of synonyms, antonyms, and prepositions. New York: Funk and Wagnall's Company, Inc.
10. Fisher, R. P., & Craik, F. I. M. (1977). Interaction between encoding and retrieval operations in cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 3, 701-711.
11. Godden, D.R., & Baddeley, A.D. (1975) Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and underwater. British Journal of Psychology, 66, 325-331.
12. Gregg, V. (1976). Word frequency, recognition and recall. In J. Brown (Ed.). Recall and recognition (pp. 183-216). London: Wiley.
13. Hayakawa, S., & the Funk & Wagnall's Dictionary Staff. (1968). Modern guide to synonyms and related words. New York: Funk and Wagnall's.
14. Hirshman, E., Trembath, D., & Mulligan, N. W. (1994). Theoretical implications of the mnemonic benefits of perceptual interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 608-620.
15. Jacoby, L. L. (1978). On interpreting the effects of repetition: Solving a problem versus remembering a solution. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17, 649-667.
16. Kolers, P. (1973). Remembering operations. Memory & Cognition, 1, 347-355.
17. Kucera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1970). Computational analysis of present day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
18. Lewis, N. (Ed.) (1980). The new Roget's thesaurus in dictionary form. New York: Berkeley Books.
19. Morris, C. D., Bransford, J. D, & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus test-appropriate strategies. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519-533.
20. Mulligan, N. W. (1996). The effects of perceptual interference at encoding on implicit memory, explicit memory, and memory for source. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1067-1087.
21. Myers, J. L., Shinjo, M., & Duffy, S. A. (1987). Degree of causal relatedness and memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 453-465.
22. Nilsson, L. G., & Gardiner J. M. (1993). Identifying exceptions in a database of recognition failure studies from 1973 to 1992. Memory & Cognition, 21, 397-410.
23. Reder, L. M., Anderson, J. R., & Bjork, R. A. (1974). A semantic interpretation of encoding specificity. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 102, 648-656.
24. Roediger, H. L., Weldon, M. S., & Chalis, B. A. (1989). Explaining dissociations between implicit and explicit measures of retention: A processing account. In H. L. Roediger III and F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Variations of memory and consciousness: Essays in honour of Endel Tulving (pp. 3-41). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Slamecka, N.J., & Graf, P. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 592-604.
26. Thompson, D. (Ed.) (1993). The Oxford dictionary of current English: New Edition. Toronto, ON: Oxford University Press.
27. Thorndyke, E., & Lorge, I. (1944). The teacher's word book of 30,000 words. New York: Bureau of Publications; Teacher's College, Columbia University.
28. Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of episodic memory. New York: Oxford University Press.
29. Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1973). Encoding specificity and retrieval processes in episodic memory. Psychological Review, 80, 352-373.
30. Wiseman, S., & Tulving, E. (1976). Encoding specificity: Relation between recall superiority and recognition failure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 2, 349-361.