Performance on recognition memory and perceptual identification tests as a function of conditions at learning (no context; context; or generate). Adapted from Jacoby (1983).

processing of stimulus meaning (semantic task), whereas the other requires the processing of physical features of the stimulus (shallow task). Memory tests that involve mainly conceptual processing should be performed better after semantic than shallow processing, but this should not be the case for tests based on perceptual processing.

As we saw in Chapter 6, there is generally a strong levels-of-processing effect with conceptual memory tests such as free recall, cued recall, and recognition memory. What about the findings from perceptual memory tests? Some evidence supporting the distinction between perceptual and conceptual implicit memory tests was reported by Srinivas and Roediger (1990). Manipulation of the level of processing (i.e., semantic vs. non-semantic) at the time of learning affected priming on a conceptual test, but did not affect priming on a perceptual test. There are several other studies reporting that the level of processing had no effect on perceptual priming. However, Challis and Brodbeck (1992) reviewed the literature. They concluded that the level of processing has some effect on implicit perceptual tests (e.g., word-stem completion; word-fragment completion). The effects tended to be smaller than those on implicit conceptual tests. However, the levels-of-processing effect was greater than 10% in 11 out of 35 comparisons, and between 5% and 10% in 12 more comparisons.

3. The effects of study-modality manipulation. Suppose that words are presented in the auditory modality at the time of learning, but in the visual modality at the time of test. According to the theory, changing the stimulus modality should reduce performance on memory tests involving perceptual processes (e.g., perceptual identification), but should not do so for tests based on conceptual processes (e.g., recognition memory). There is some support for these predictions (e.g., Blaxton, 1989).

One way of testing the transfer appropriate processing theory is by an attentional manipulation at the time of learning. In one condition (full attention), the participants only have to learn the to-be-remembered material. In the other condition (divided attention), they have to learn the material and perform another task at the same time. It has typically been assumed that dividing attention at study reduces conceptual or

Memory performance on graphemic cued recall and graphemic recognition in full and divided attention conditions. Data from Mulligan (1998).

Stop Anxiety Attacks

Stop Anxiety Attacks

Here's How You Could End Anxiety and Panic Attacks For Good Prevent Anxiety in Your Golden Years Without Harmful Prescription Drugs. If You Give Me 15 minutes, I Will Show You a Breakthrough That Will Change The Way You Think About Anxiety and Panic Attacks Forever! If you are still suffering because your doctor can't help you, here's some great news...!

Get My Free Ebook

Post a comment