Hyper-binding: A unique age effect

Psychological Science

Volumn 21, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 399-405

  Campbell, Karen L ^a,b   Hasher, Lynn ^a,b   Thomas, Ruthann C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^b ROTMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

Aging; Associative memory; Attention; Binding; Inhibition

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGING; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; FEMALE; HUMAN; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); LEARNING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; READING; RECALL; SEMANTICS; PSYCHOLOGY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGING; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INHIBITION (PSYCHOLOGY); MALE; MENTAL RECALL; MIDDLE AGED; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; READING; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77949917522     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0956797609359910     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Anderson, J.R. (1974). Retrieval of propositional information from long-term memory. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 451-474.
2. Chalfonte, B.L., & Johnson, M.K. (1996). Feature memory and binding in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 24, 403-416.
3. Crocker, J. (1981). Judgment of covariation by social perceivers. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 272-292.
4. Eriksen, C.W., & Schultz, D.W. (1979). Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 249-263.
5. Gazzaley, A., Cooney, J.W., Rissman, J., & D'Esposito, M. (2005). Top-down suppression deficit underlies working memory impairment in normal aging. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1298-1300.
6. Gigerenzer, G. (2008). Why heuristics work. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 20-29.
7. Hasher, L., Zacks, R.T., & May, C.P. (1999). Inhibitory control, circadian arousal, and age. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII (pp. 653-675). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Healey, M.K., Campbell, K.L., & Hasher, L. (2008). Cognitive aging and increased distractibility: Costs and potential benefits. In W.S. Sossin, J.C. Lacaille, V.F. Castellucci, & S. Belleville (Eds.), Progress in brain research: Vol. 169. Essence of memory (pp. 353-363). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
9. Healey, M.K., Campbell, K.L., Hasher, L., & Ossher, L. (2009). Direct evidence for the role of inhibition in resolving interference. Manuscript submitted for publication.
10. Healey, M.K., Zacks, R.T., Hasher, L., & Helder, E. (2009). Inhibition and the relationship between working memory and fluid intelligence. Manuscript in preparation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
11. Hogarth, R.M. (2005). Deciding analytically or trusting your intuition? The advantages and disadvantages of analytic and intuitive thought. In T. Betsch & S. Haberstroh (Eds.), The routines of decision making (pp. 67-82). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Jonides, J., Lewis, R.L., Nee, D.E., Lustig, C.A., Berman, M.G., & Moore, K.S. (2008). The mind and brain of short-term memory. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 193-224.
13. Kim, S., Hasher, L., & Zacks, R.T. (2007). Aging and a benefit of distractibility. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 301-305.
14. Logan, G.D., & Etherton, J.L. (1994). What is learned during automatization? The role of attention in constructing an instance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 1022-1050.
15. Lustig, C., Hasher, L., & Tonev, S.T. (2006). Distraction as a determinant of processing speed. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 619-625.
16. Masson, M.E.J., & Loftus, G.R. (2003). Using confidence intervals for graphically based data interpretation. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 203-220.
17. Mattay, V.S., Fera, F., Tessitore, A., Hariri, A.R., Berman, K.F., Das, S., et al. (2006). Neurophysiological correlates of age-related changes in working memory capacity. Neuroscience Letters, 392, 32-37.
18. May, C.P. (1999). Synchrony effects in cognition: The costs and a benefit. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 142-147.
19. McKenzie, C.R.M. (1994). The accuracy of intuitive judgment strategies: Covariation assessment and Bayesian inference. Cognitive Psychology, 26, 209-239.
20. Moscovitch, M. (1994). Memory and working with memory: Evaluation of a component process model and comparisons with other models. In D.L. Schacter & E. Tulving (Eds.), Memory systems 1994 (pp. 269-311). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Naveh-Benjamin, M. (2000). Adult age differences in memory performance: Tests of an associative deficit hypothesis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1170-1187.
22. Naveh-Benjamin, M., Brav, T.K., & Levy, O. (2007). The associative memory deficit in older adults: The role of strategy utilization. Psychology and Aging, 22, 202-208.
23. Nigg, J.T., Carr, L.A., Martel, M.M., & Henderson, J.M. (2007). Concepts of inhibition and developmental psychopathology. In C. MacCleod & D. Gorfein (Eds.), Inhibition in cognition (pp. 259-277). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press.
24. Rabbit, P.M.A. (1965). An age deficit in the ability to ignore irrelevant information. Journal of Gerontology, 20, 233-238.
25. Rowe, G., Valderrama, S., Hasher, L., & Lenartowicz, A. (2006). Attentional disregulation: A benefit for implicit memory. Psychology and Aging, 21, 826-830.
26. Sedlmeier, P. (2005). From associations to intuitive judgment and decision making: Implicitly learning from experience. In T. Betsch & S. Haberstroh (Eds.), The routines of decision making (pp. 83-99). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Shipley, W.C. (1946). Institute of Living Scale. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
28. Snodgrass, J.G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). Norms for picture stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 205-210.
29. Treisman, A.M., & Gelade, G. (1980). A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 97-136.
30. Verhaeghen, P. (2003). Aging and vocabulary scores: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 18, 332-339.
31. Watkins, O.C., & Watkins, M.J. (1975). Buildup of proactive inhibition as a cue-overload effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 1, 442-452.
32. Wühr, P., & Frings, C. (2008). A case for inhibition: Visual attention suppresses the processing of irrelevant objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137, 116-130.