Short-Term Memory Scanning Viewed as Exemplar-Based Categorization

Psychological Review

Volumn 118, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 280-315

  Nosofsky, Robert M ^a   Little, Daniel R ^b   Donkin, Christopher ^a   Fific, Mario ^c  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR HUMAN DEVELOPMENT   (Germany)

Author keywords

Categorization; Exemplar models; Memory scanning; Recognition; Response times

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; SHORT TERM MEMORY;

COGNITION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MEMORY, SHORT-TERM; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY);

EID: 79954995450     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0022494     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Atkinson R.C., Shiffrin R.M. Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. Advances in the psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 2. Research and theory 1968, 89-195. Academic Press, New York, NY. K.W. Spence, J.T. Spence (Eds.).
2. Awh E., Barton B., Vogel E.K. Visual working memory represents a fixed number of items regardless of complexity. Psychological Science 2007, 18:622-628. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01949.x.
3. Brown S., Heathcote A. A ballistic model of choice response time. Psychological Review 2005, 112:117-128. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.117.
4. Clark S.E., Gronlund S.D. Global matching models of recognition memory: How the models match the data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1996, 3:37-60.
5. Cohen A.L., Nosofsky R.M. An extension of the exemplar-based random-walk model to separable-dimension stimuli. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 2003, 47:150-165. doi: 10.1016/S0022-2496(02)00031-7.
6. Eich J.M. A composite holographic associative recall model. Psychological Review 1982, 89:627-661. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.89.6.627.
7. Estes W.K. Classification and cognition 1994, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
8. Fific M., Little D.R., Nosofsky R.M. Logical-rule models of classification response times: A synthesis of mental-architecture, random-walk, and decision-bound approaches. Psychological Review 2010, 117:309-348. doi: 10.1037/a0018526.
9. Garner W.R. The processing of information and structure 1974, Erlbaum, Potomac, MD.
10. Gillund G., Shiffrin R.M. A retrieval model for both recognition and recall. Psychological Review 1984, 91:1-67. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.91.1.1.
11. Glanzer M., Adams J.K. The mirror effect in recognition memory: Data and theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1990, 16:5-16. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.16.1.5.
12. Heathcote A., Popiel S.J., Mewhort D.J.K. Analysis of response time distributions: An example using the Stroop task. Psychological Bulletin 1991, 109:340-347. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.340.
13. Hintzman D.L. " Schema abstraction" in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review 1986, 93:411-428. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.93.4.411.
14. Hintzman D.L. Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review 1988, 95:528-551. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.528.
15. Hintzman D.L., Caulton D.A., Curran T. Retrieval constraints and the mirror effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1994, 20:275-289. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.20.2.275.
16. Hockley W.E. Analysis of response time distributions in the study of cognitive processes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1984, 10:598-615. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.10.4.598.
17. Hockley W.E., Corballis M.C. Tests of serial scanning in item recognition. Canadian Journal of Psychology 1982, 36:189-212. doi: 10.1037/h0080637.
18. Hooke R., Jeeves T.A. Direct search solution of numerical and statistical problems. Journal of the ACM 1961, 8:212-229. doi: 10.1145/321062.321069.
19. Huang J., Kahana M.J., Sekuler R. A task-irrelevant stimulus attribute affects perception and short-term memory. Memory & Cognition 2009, 37:1088-1102. doi: 10.3758/MC.37.8.1088.
20. Johns E.E., Mewhort D.J.K. What information underlies correct rejections in recognition from episodic memory?. Memory & Cognition 2002, 30:46-59.
21. Kahana M.J., Loftus G. Response time versus accuracy in human memory. The nature of cognition 1999, 323-384. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. R. Sternberg (Ed.).
22. Kahana M.J., Sekuler R. Recognizing spatial patterns: A noisy exemplar approach. Vision Research 2002, 42:2177-2192. doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(02)00118-9.
23. Kahana M.J., Zhou F., Geller A., Sekuler R. Lure-similarity affects visual episodic recognition: Detailed tests of a noisy exemplar model. Memory & Cognition 2007, 35:1222-1232.
24. Lamberts K. Categorization under time pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1995, 124:161-180. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.161.
25. Lamberts K. The time course of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1998, 24:695-711. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.3.695.
26. Lamberts K. Information accumulation theory of categorization. Psychological Review 2000, 107:227-260. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.107.2.227.
27. Lamberts K., Brockdorff N., Heit E. Feature-sampling and random-walk models of individual-stimulus recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2003, 132:351-378. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.132.3.351.
28. Little D.R., Nosofsky R.M., Denton S.E. Response-time tests of logical-rule models of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2011, 37:1-27. doi: 10.1037/a0021330.
29. Liu C.C., Smith P.L. Comparing time-accuracy curves: Beyond goodness-of-fit measures. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2009, 16:190-203. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.1.190.
30. Lockhead G.R. Processing dimensional stimuli: A note. Psychological Review 1972, 79:410-419. doi: 10.1037/h0033129.
31. Logan G.D. Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review 1988, 95:492-527. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492.
32. Luck S.J., Vogel E.K. The capacity of visual working memory for features and conjunctions. Nature 1997, November 20, 390:279-281. doi: 10.1038/36846.
33. Matzke D., Wagenmakers E.J. Psychological interpretation of the ex-Gaussian and shifted Wald parameters: A diffusion model analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2009, 16:798-817. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.5.798.
34. McElree B., Dosher B.A. Serial position and set size in short-term memory: The time course of recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1989, 118:346-373. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.118.4.346.
35. Medin D.L., Schaffer M.M. Context theory of classification learning. Psychological Review 1978, 85:207-238. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.3.207.
36. Mewhort D.J.K., Johns E.E. The extralist-feature effect: A test of item matching in short-term recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2000, 129:262-284. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.129.2.262.
37. Mewhort D.J.K., Johns E.E. Sharpening the echo: An iterative-resonance model for short-term recognition memory. Memory 2005, 13:300-307. doi: 10.1080/09658210344000242.
38. Meyer D.E., Irwin D.E., Osman A.M., Kounios J. The dynamics of cognition: Mental processes inferred from a speed-accuracy decomposition technique. Psychological Review 1988, 95:183-237. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.183.
39. Monsell S. Recency, immediate recognition memory, and reaction time. Cognitive Psychology 1978, 10:465-501. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(78)90008-7.
40. Murdock B.B. A parallel-processing model for scanning. Perception & Psychophysics 1971, 10:289-291.
41. Murdock B.B. A theory for the storage and retrieval of item and associative information. Psychological Review 1982, 89:609-626. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.89.6.609.
42. Murdock B.B. An analysis of the strength-latency relationship. Memory & Cognition 1985, 13:511-521.
43. Nosofsky R.M. Choice, similarity, and the context theory of classification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1984, 10:104-114. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.10.1.104.
44. Nosofsky R.M. Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1986, 115:39-57. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.115.1.39.
45. Nosofsky R.M. Attention and learning processes in the identification and categorization of integral stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1987, 13:87-109.
46. Nosofsky R.M. Exemplar-based accounts of relations between classification, recognition, and typicality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1988, 14:700-708. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.14.4.700.
47. Nosofsky R.M. Tests of an exemplar model for relating perceptual classification and recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1991, 17:3-27. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.17.1.3.
48. Nosofsky R.M., Kantner J. Exemplar similarity, study-list homogeneity, and short-term perceptual recognition. Memory & Cognition 2006, 34:112-124.
49. Nosofsky R.M., Palmeri T.J. Comparing exemplar-retrieval and decision-bound models of speeded perceptual classification. Perception & Psychophysics 1997, 59:1027-1048.
50. Nosofsky R.M., Palmeri T.J. An exemplar-based random walk model of speeded classification. Psychological Review 1997, 104:266-300. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.266.
51. Nosofsky R.M., Stanton R.D. Speeded classification in a probabilistic category structure: Contrasting exemplar-retrieval, decision-boundary, and prototype models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2005, 31:608-629. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.31.3.608.
52. Nosofsky R.M., Stanton R.D. Speeded old-new recognition of multidimensional perceptual stimuli: Modeling performance at the individual-participant and individual-item levels. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:314-334. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.314.
53. Nosofsky R.M., Zaki S.R. A hybrid-similarity exemplar model for predicting distinctiveness effects in perceptual old-new recognition memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2003, 29:1194-1209. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.6.1194.
54. Omohundro J., Homa D. Search for abstracted information. American Journal of Psychology 1981, 94:267-290. doi: 10.2307/1422745.
55. Öztekin I., Davachi L., McElree B. Are representations in working memory distinct from representations in long-term memory? Neural evidence in support of a single store. Psychological Science 2010, 21:1123-1133. doi: 10.1177/0956797610376651.
56. Posner M.I., Keele S.W. On the genesis of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1968, 77:353-363. doi: 10.1037/h0025953.
57. Posner M.I., Keele S.W. Retention of abstract ideas. Journal of Experimental Psychology 1970, 83:304-308. doi: 10.1037/h0028558.
58. Ratcliff R. A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review 1978, 85:59-108. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.2.59.
59. Ratcliff R. Theoretical interpretations of the speed and accuracy of positive and negative responses. Psychological Review 1985, 92:212-225. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.92.2.212.
60. Ratcliff R. Continuous versus discrete information processing: Modeling the accumulation of partial information. Psychological Review 1988, 95:238-255. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.238.
61. Ratcliff R. Modeling response signal and response time data. Cognitive Psychology 2006, 53:195-237.
62. Ratcliff R., Clark S., Shiffrin R.M. List-strength effect: I. Data and discussion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1990, 16:163-178. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.16.2.163.
63. Ratcliff R., Murdock B.B. Retrieval processes in recognition memory. Psychological Review 1976, 83:190-214. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.83.3.190.
64. Ratcliff R., Van Zandt T., McKoon G. Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. Psychological Review 1999, 106:261-300. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.106.2.261.
65. Reed A.V. Speed-accuracy trade-off in recognition memory. Science 1973, August 10, 181:574-576. doi: 10.1126/science.181.4099.574.
66. Rouder J.N., Morey R.D., Cowan N., Zwilling C.E., Morey C.C., Pratte M.S. An assessment of fixed-capacity models of visual working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 2008, 105:5975-5979. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0711295105.
67. Schwarz G. Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics 1978, 6:461-464.
68. Sekuler R., Kahana M.J. A stimulus-oriented approach to memory. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2007, 16:305-310. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00526.x.
69. Shepard R.N. Attention and the metric structure of the stimulus space. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 1964, 1:54-87. doi: 10.1016/0022-2496(64)90017-3.
70. Shepard R.N. Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. Science 1987, September 11, 237:1317-1323. doi: 10.1126/science.3629243.
71. Shiffrin R.M., Ratcliff R., Clark S. List-strength effect: II. Theoretical mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1990, 16:179-195. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.16.2.179.
72. Shiffrin R.M., Schneider W. Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychological Review 1977, 84:127-189.
73. Shiffrin R.M., Steyvers M. A model for recognition memory: REM-retrieving effectively from memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 1997, 4:145-166.
74. Sternberg S. High-speed scanning in human memory. Science 1966, August 5, 153:652-654. doi: 10.1126/science.153.3736.652.
75. Sternberg S. Memory scanning: Mental processes revealed by reaction-time experiments. American Scientist 1969, 4:421-457.
76. Sternberg S. Memory scanning: New findings and current controversies. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 1975, 27:1-32. doi: 10.1080/14640747508400459.
77. Tversky A. Features of similarity. Psychological Review 1977, 84:327-352. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.4.327.
78. Van Aken H. Munsell Conversion Software (Version 6.5.1) [Software] 2006, Retrieved from http://livingstonmanor.net/Munsell2011/index.htm.
79. Viswanathan S., Perl D.R., Visscher K.M., Kahana M.J., Sekuler R. Homogeneity computation: How interitem similarity in visual short-term memory alters recognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2010, 17:59-65. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.1.59.
80. Wickelgren W.A. Single-trace fragility theory of memory dynamics. Memory & Cognition 1974, 2:775-780.
81. Wixted J.T., Carpenter S.K. The Wickelgren power law and the Ebbinghaus savings function. Psychological Science 2007, 18:133-134. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01862.x.
82. Zhang W., Luck S.J. Sudden death and gradual decay in visual working memory. Psychological Science 2009, 20:423-428. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02322.x.