Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The categories were not made apparent in the original list. Participants in the free recall group were asked to write down as many words as they could remember from the list. Participants in the cued recall group were also asked to recall the words, but this group was provided with the names of the categories, "birds", "furniture", and ...
After a five-second delay, the recall of recently studied words diminishes. However, word pairs at the beginning of a list still show better recall. Moreover, in a longer list, the absolute number of word pairs recalled is greater but in a shorter list of word pairs, the percentage of word pairs recalled is greater.
For example, experiments have shown that if a research participant is presented with the words: bed rest awake tired dream wake snooze snore nap yawn drowsy, there is a high likelihood that the participant will falsely recall that the word sleep was in the list of words. These results show a significant illusion in memory, in which people ...
Studies have also been done to address the best method for recalling lists of unrelated words. In contrast to free recall, another type of study is known as the serial recall paradigm, where participants are asked to recall the presented items in their correct order rather than the order that comes to mind at the time of testing, randomly.
The subjects are read a list of associated words by the experimenter. These associated words could be for example: bed, rest, dream, tried, awake, etc. [2] [13] After the subjects have heard these words, they are required to engage in a free recall task in which they must list the words they have heard. The researchers carried out two experiments.
In free recall and serial recall, the modality effect is seen as simply an exaggerated recency effect in tests where presentation is auditory. In short-term sentence recall studies, emphasis is placed on words in a distractor-word list when requesting information from the remembered sentence.
During a recall task, people benefit equally from a weakly related cue word as from a strongly related cue word, provided the weakly related word was present at encoding. [5] Regardless of semantic relatedness of the paired words, participants more effectively recalled target words that had been primed when prompted for recall. [6]
Although all the words in any list were associated with the critical lure, Deese found that the likelihood of false recall depended heavily on the ability of the list words to activate the critical lure – for example Deese claimed that a list containing 'short' could produce recall of the lure 'man', but a list containing 'man' could not ...