Depth of processing pictures of faces and recognition memory

G. Bower, Martin B. Karlin
{"title":"Depth of processing pictures of faces and recognition memory","authors":"G. Bower, Martin B. Karlin","doi":"10.1037/H0037190","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"These studies ask whether S remembers a picture better the greater the \"depth of processing\" he allots to it. Depth of processing pictures of faces was varied according to judgments of sex (\"superficial\") or judgments of likableness or honesty of the person pictured. Performance on a later recognition memory test was high for pictures judged for likableness or honesty, and low for pictures judged for sex. This ordering held as'true for intentional learners as for incidental learners. A final experiment showed that face recognition memory was not materially affected by a context manipulation: an old test picture was remembered at a level determined by its original depth of processing and independently of how it was tested—either alone, along side an old picture it had been studied with, or with a new picture. In a recent paper, Craik and Lockhart (1972) argued that \"depth of processing\" of stimulus material is a direct determinant of how well that material will be remembered. The underlying assumption in their approach is that a stimulus is processed through a series of stages with different kinds of information being extracted from or triggered off by the stimulus at successive stages. Sensory features of the stimulus are presumably extracted first, whereas associative information (such as the name or meaning of a grapheme) becomes available later. In support of their depth of processing hypothesis, Craik and Lockhart review studies showing higher incidental learning for words which 5s had processed for meaning than for items processed for physical attributes. For instance, Hyde and Jenkins (1969) oriented 5s to answer different questions with respect to a word, either counting the number of letters in it or the number of es, or rating it for pleasantness. Those 5s who did the pleasantness judgments recalled the words later much better than did the other 5s. Similarly, Johnston and Jenkins (1971) showed that 5s required to think of an adjective appropriate to a presented","PeriodicalId":50196,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":"103 1","pages":"751-757"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1974-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1037/H0037190","citationCount":"421","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/H0037190","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 421

Abstract

These studies ask whether S remembers a picture better the greater the "depth of processing" he allots to it. Depth of processing pictures of faces was varied according to judgments of sex ("superficial") or judgments of likableness or honesty of the person pictured. Performance on a later recognition memory test was high for pictures judged for likableness or honesty, and low for pictures judged for sex. This ordering held as'true for intentional learners as for incidental learners. A final experiment showed that face recognition memory was not materially affected by a context manipulation: an old test picture was remembered at a level determined by its original depth of processing and independently of how it was tested—either alone, along side an old picture it had been studied with, or with a new picture. In a recent paper, Craik and Lockhart (1972) argued that "depth of processing" of stimulus material is a direct determinant of how well that material will be remembered. The underlying assumption in their approach is that a stimulus is processed through a series of stages with different kinds of information being extracted from or triggered off by the stimulus at successive stages. Sensory features of the stimulus are presumably extracted first, whereas associative information (such as the name or meaning of a grapheme) becomes available later. In support of their depth of processing hypothesis, Craik and Lockhart review studies showing higher incidental learning for words which 5s had processed for meaning than for items processed for physical attributes. For instance, Hyde and Jenkins (1969) oriented 5s to answer different questions with respect to a word, either counting the number of letters in it or the number of es, or rating it for pleasantness. Those 5s who did the pleasantness judgments recalled the words later much better than did the other 5s. Similarly, Johnston and Jenkins (1971) showed that 5s required to think of an adjective appropriate to a presented
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
深度处理人脸图片和识别记忆
这些研究问的是,S分配给图片的“处理深度”越大,他对图片的记忆是否越好。人脸图片的处理深度根据对性别(“肤浅”)或对照片中人的可爱度或诚实度的判断而有所不同。在随后的识别记忆测试中,被判断为可爱或诚实的照片的表现较高,而被判断为性的照片的表现较低。这个顺序对有意学习者和偶然学习者都成立。最后一项实验表明,人脸识别记忆并没有受到上下文操作的实质性影响:一张旧的测试图片被记住的程度是由它最初的处理深度决定的,与它是如何被测试的无关——要么单独与一张旧图片一起研究,要么与一张新图片一起研究。在最近的一篇论文中,Craik和Lockhart(1972)认为,刺激材料的“加工深度”是该材料被记忆程度的直接决定因素。他们的方法的基本假设是,刺激经过一系列的阶段处理,不同种类的信息从刺激中提取出来或在连续的阶段被刺激触发。刺激的感觉特征可能首先被提取出来,而联想信息(如字素的名称或含义)则在稍后获得。为了支持他们的深度加工假说,Craik和Lockhart回顾了一些研究,这些研究表明,对于那些被加工为含义的单词,偶然学习的程度要高于那些被加工为物理属性的单词。例如,海德和詹金斯(1969)让5岁的孩子回答与一个单词有关的不同问题,要么计算单词中字母的数量,要么计算单词中字母的数量,要么给单词的愉快程度打分。那些做了愉快性判断的5岁的人比其他5岁的人对单词的记忆要好得多。同样,Johnston和Jenkins(1971)表明,5s要求想出一个适合被呈现事物的形容词
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
Brain Potentials as Indices of Orthographic and Phonological Interaction During word Matching Persistence: the role of partial reinforcement in psychotherapy. Attention and the detection of signals. Attention and the detection of signals. Persistence: the role of partial reinforcement in psychotherapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1