Adult age differences in subjective context retrieval in dual-list free recall.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Memory Pub Date : 2023-02-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-29 DOI:10.1080/09658211.2022.2139846
Sydney M Garlitch, Lauren L Richmond, B Hunter Ball, Christopher N Wahlheim
{"title":"Adult age differences in subjective context retrieval in dual-list free recall.","authors":"Sydney M Garlitch, Lauren L Richmond, B Hunter Ball, Christopher N Wahlheim","doi":"10.1080/09658211.2022.2139846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Age-related episodic memory deficits imply that older and younger adults differentially retrieve and monitor contextual features that indicate the source of studied information. Such differences have been shown in subjective reports during recognition and cued recall as well as process estimates derived from computational models of free recall organisation. The present study extends the subject report method to free recall to characterise age differences in context retrieval and monitoring, and to test assumptions from a context-based computational model. Older and younger adults studied two lists of semantically related words and then recalled from only the first or second list. After each recall, participants indicated their subjective context retrieval using remember/know judgments. Compared to younger adults, older adults showed lower recall accuracy and subjective reports of context retrieval (i.e., remember judgments) that were less specific to correct recalls. These differences appeared after first-recall attempts. Recall functions conditioned on serial positions were more continual across correct recalls from target lists and intrusions from non-target lists for older than younger adults. Together with other analyses of context retrieval and monitoring reported here, these findings suggest that older adults retrieved context less distinctively across the recall period, leading to greater perceived similarity for temporally contiguous lists.</p>","PeriodicalId":18569,"journal":{"name":"Memory","volume":"31 2","pages":"218-233"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9992089/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Memory","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09658211.2022.2139846","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Age-related episodic memory deficits imply that older and younger adults differentially retrieve and monitor contextual features that indicate the source of studied information. Such differences have been shown in subjective reports during recognition and cued recall as well as process estimates derived from computational models of free recall organisation. The present study extends the subject report method to free recall to characterise age differences in context retrieval and monitoring, and to test assumptions from a context-based computational model. Older and younger adults studied two lists of semantically related words and then recalled from only the first or second list. After each recall, participants indicated their subjective context retrieval using remember/know judgments. Compared to younger adults, older adults showed lower recall accuracy and subjective reports of context retrieval (i.e., remember judgments) that were less specific to correct recalls. These differences appeared after first-recall attempts. Recall functions conditioned on serial positions were more continual across correct recalls from target lists and intrusions from non-target lists for older than younger adults. Together with other analyses of context retrieval and monitoring reported here, these findings suggest that older adults retrieved context less distinctively across the recall period, leading to greater perceived similarity for temporally contiguous lists.

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
双列表自由回忆中主观语境检索的成人年龄差异。
与年龄相关的外显记忆缺陷意味着,老年人和年轻人在检索和监测显示所学信息来源的上下文特征时存在差异。这种差异已在识别和诱导回忆过程中的主观报告以及自由回忆组织计算模型得出的过程估计中得到证实。本研究将主观报告法扩展到自由回忆中,以描述上下文检索和监测的年龄差异,并检验基于上下文的计算模型的假设。老年人和年轻人研究了两份语义相关的单词表,然后只对第一或第二份单词表进行回忆。每次回忆之后,受试者都会通过 "记住/知道 "判断来表明自己的主观语境检索结果。与年轻人相比,老年人的回忆准确率较低,对语境检索的主观报告(即记忆判断)对正确回忆的特异性较低。这些差异出现在首次回忆尝试之后。与年轻人相比,老年人在从目标列表中正确回忆和从非目标列表中侵入时,以序列位置为条件的回忆功能更具持续性。结合本文报告的其他语境检索和监测分析,这些研究结果表明,老年人在整个回忆期间检索语境的独特性较低,导致对时间上连续的列表的感知相似性更高。
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
Memory
Memory PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
9.50%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: Memory publishes high quality papers in all areas of memory research. This includes experimental studies of memory (including laboratory-based research, everyday memory studies, and applied memory research), developmental, educational, neuropsychological, clinical and social research on memory. By representing all significant areas of memory research, the journal cuts across the traditional distinctions of psychological research. Memory therefore provides a unique venue for memory researchers to communicate their findings and ideas both to peers within their own research tradition in the study of memory, and also to the wider range of research communities with direct interest in human memory.
期刊最新文献
Development and validation of the Closure and Resolution Scale (CRS). People experience similar intrusions about past and future autobiographical negative experiences. Comparison of working memory performance in athletes and non-athletes: a meta-analysis of behavioural studies. On the role of familiarity and developmental exposure in music-evoked autobiographical memories. Intrinsic functional connectivity in medial temporal lobe networks is associated with susceptibility to misinformation.
×
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