Can fluency be interpreted as novelty? Retraining the interpretation of fluency in recognition memory

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 653-664

  Olds, Justin M ^a   Westerman, Deanne L ^a  

^a BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Familiarity; Fluency heuristic; Perceptual fluency; Processing fluency; Recognition memory

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; MALE; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TEST; NOMENCLATURE; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; RECALL; RECOGNITION; STUDENT; UNIVERSITY;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; NAMES; NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS; PHOTIC STIMULATION; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); STUDENTS; UNIVERSITIES; VERBAL LEARNING; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84865685314     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0026784     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Alter, A. L., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 219-235. doi:10.1177/1088868309341564
2. Ashby, F. G., & Maddox, W. T. (2005). Human category learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 149-178. doi:10.1146/annurev .psych.56.091103.070217
3. Brunswik (1957). Scope and aspects of the cognitive problem. In H. Gruber, K. R. Hammond, & R. Jessor (Eds.), Contemporary approaches to cognition (pp. 5-31). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Drummey, A. B., & Newcombe, N. (1995). Remembering versus knowing the past: Children's explicit and implicit memories for pictures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 59, 549-565. doi:10.1006/ jecp.1995.1025
5. Gallo, D., Perlmutter, D. H., Moore, C. D., & Schacter, D. L. (2008). Distinctive encoding reduces the Jacoby-Whitehouse illusion. Memory & Cognition, 2008, 36, 461-466. doi:10.3758/MC.36.2.461
6. Guttentag, R., & Dunn, J. (2003). Judgments of remembering: The reve-lation effect in children and adults. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 86, 153-167. doi:10.1016/S0022-0965(03)00135-8
7. Harris, C. S. (1965). Perceptual adaptation to inverted, reversed, and displaced vision. Psychological Review, 72, 419-444. doi:10.1037/h0022616
8. Hintzman, D. L. (1988). Judgments of frequency and recognition memory in a multiple-trace memory model. Psychological Review, 95, 528-551. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.528
9. Hintzman, D. L. (2004). Judgments of frequency vs. recognition confi-dence: Repetition and recursive reminding. Memory & Cognition, 32, 336-350. doi:10.3758/BF03196863
10. Huber, D. E., Clark, T. F., Curran, T., & Winkielman, P. (2008). Effects of repetition priming on recognition memory: Testing a perceptual fluency-disfluency model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Mem-ory, and Cognition, 34, 1305-1324. doi:10.1037/a0013370
11. Jacoby, L. L., & Dallas, M. (1981). On the relationship between autobio-graphical memory and perceptual learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 110, 306-340. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.110.3.306
12. Jacoby, L. L., Kelley, C. M., & Dywan, J. (1989). Memory attributions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Jacoby, L. L., & Whitehouse, K. (1989). An illusion of memory: False recognition influenced by unconscious perception. Journal of Experi-mental Psychology: General, 118, 126-135. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.118.2.126
14. Kelley, C. M., & Rhodes, M. G. (2002). Making sense and nonsense of experience: Attributions in memory and judgment. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 41, pp. 293-320). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Kohler, I. (1963). The formation and transformation of the perceptual world. Psychological Issues, 3(4, Serial No. 12), 1-173.
16. Kurilla, B. P., & Westerman, D. L. (2008). Processing fluency affects subjective claims of recollection. Memory & Cognition, 36, 82-92. doi:10.3758/MC.36.1.82
17. Lloyd, M. E., Westerman, D. L., & Miller, J. K. (2003). The fluency heuristic in recognition memory: The effect of repetition. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 603-614. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00535-1
18. Macmillan, N. A., & Creelman, C. D. (2005). Detection theory: A user's guide (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. McCandliss, B. D., Fiez, J. A., Protopapas, A., Conway, M., & McClel-land, J. L. (2002). Success and failure in teaching the r-l contrast to Japanese adults: Tests of a Hebbian model of plasticity and stabilization in spoken language perception. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neu-roscience, 2, 89-108. doi:10.3758/CABN.2.2.89
20. Miller, J. K., Lloyd, M. E., & Westerman, D. L. (2008). When does modality matter? perceptual versus conceptual fluency-based illusions in recognition memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 1080-1094. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.006
21. Pastore, R. E., Crawley, E. J., Berens, M. S., & Skelly, M. A. (2003). "Nonparametric" AUniversal-GreekwithMathPi.-1.H11032 and other modern misconceptions about signal detection theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 556-569.
22. Reber, R., & Schwarz, N. (1999). Effects of perceptual fluency on judg-ments of truth. Consciousness and Cognition, 8, 338-342. doi:10.1006/ ccog.1999.0386
23. Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science, 171, 701-703. doi:10.1126/science.171.3972.701
24. Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimen-tal Psychology: General, 117, 34-50. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.117.1.34
25. Thapar, A., & Westerman, D. L. (2009). Aging and fluency based illusions of recognition memory. Psychology and Aging, 24, 595-603. doi: 10.1037/a0016575
26. Tolman, E. C., & Brunswick, E. (1935). The organism and the causal texture of the environment. Psychological Review, 42, 43-77. doi: 10.1037/h0062156
27. Underwood, B. J., Zimmerman, J., & Freund, J. S. (1971). Retention of frequency information with observations on recognition and recall. Jour-nal of Experimental Psychology, 87, 149-162. doi:10.1037/h0030544
28. Unkelbach, C. (2006). The learned interpretation of cognitive fluency. Psychological Science, 17, 339-345. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280 .2006.01708.x
29. Unkelbach, C. (2007). Reversing the truth effect: Learning the interpreta-tion of processing fluency in judgments of truth. Journal of Experimen-tal Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 219-230. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.1.219
30. Unkelbach, C., Bayer, M., Alves, H., Koch, A., & Stahl, C. (2011). Fluency and positivity as possible causes of the truth effect. Consciousness and Cognition, 20, 594-602.
31. Unkelbach, C., & Stahl, C. (2009). A multinomial modeling approach to dissociate different components of the truth effect. Consciousness and Cognition, 18, 22-38. doi:10.1016/j.concog.2008.09.006
32. Westerman, D. L. (2001). The role of familiarity in item recognition, associative recognition, and plurality recognition on self-paced and speeded tests. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 723-732. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.27.3.723
33. Westerman, D. L. (2008). Relative fluency and illusions of recognition memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 1196-1200. doi:10.3758/ PBR.15.6.1196
34. Westerman, D. L., Lloyd, M. E., & Miller, J. K. (2002). The attribution of perceptual fluency in recognition memory: The role of expectation. Journal of Memory and Language, 47, 607-617. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00022-0
35. Westerman, D. L., Miller, J. K., & Lloyd, M. E. (2003). Change in perceptual form attenuates the use of the fluency heuristic in recognition. Memory & Cognition, 31, 619-629. doi:10.3758/BF03196102
36. Whittlesea, B. W. A. (1993). Illusions of familiarity. Journal of Experi-mental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 1235-1253. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.19.6.1235
37. Whittlesea, B. W. A. (2003). On the construction of behavior and subjec-tive experience: The production and evaluation of performance. In J. S. Bowers & C. J. Marsolek (Eds.), Rethinking implicit memory (pp. 239-260). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
38. Whittlesea, B. W., Jacoby, L. L., & Girard, K. (1990). Illusions of imme-diate memory: Evidence of an attributional basis for feelings of famil-iarity and perceptual quality. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 716-732. doi:10.1016/0749-596X(90)90045-2
39. Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Leboe, J. P. (2003). Two fluency heuristics and how to tell them apart. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 62-79. doi:10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00009-3
40. Whittlesea, B. W. A., & Williams, L. D. (2001). The discrepancy attribu-tion hypothesis: I. The heuristic basis of feelings and familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 3-13. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.27.1.3
41. Winkielman, P., Schwarz, N., Fazendeiro, T., & Reber, R. (2003). The hedonic marking of processing fluency: Implications for evaluative judgment. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 189-217). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.