The drawing effect: Evidence for costs and benefits using pure and mixed lists.

Drawing a referent of a to-be-remembered word often results in better recognition and recall of this word relative to a control task in which the word is written, a pattern dubbed the drawing effect. Although this effect is not always found in pure lists, we report three experiments in which the drawing effect emerged in both pure- and mixed-lists on recognition and recall tests, though the effect was larger in mixed lists. Our experiments then compared drawing effects on memory between pure- and mixed-list contexts to determine whether the larger mixed-list drawing effect reflected a benefit to draw items, a cost to write items, or a combination. In delayed recognition and free-recall tests, a mixed-list benefit emerged for draw items in which memory for mixed-list draw items was greater than pure-list draw items. This mixed-list drawing benefit was accompanied by a mixed-list writing cost compared to pure-list write items, indicating that the mixed-list drawing effect does not operate cost-free. Our findings of a pure-list drawing effect are consistent with a memory strength account, however, the larger drawing effect in mixed lists suggest that participants may also deploy a distinctiveness heuristic to aid retrieval of drawn items.

Exploring the influence of encoding format on subsequent memory.

Distinctive encoding is greatly influenced by gist-based processes and has been shown to suffer when highly similar items are presented in close succession. Thus, elucidating the mechanisms underlying how presentation format affects gist processing is essential in determining the factors that influence these encoding processes. The current study utilised multivariate partial least squares (PLS) analysis to identify encoding networks directly associated with retrieval performance in a blocked and intermixed presentation condition. Subsequent memory analysis for successfully encoded items indicated no significant differences between reaction time and retrieval performance and presentation format. Despite no significant behavioural differences, behaviour PLS revealed differences in brain-behaviour correlations and mean condition activity in brain regions associated with gist-based vs. distinctive encoding. Specifically, the intermixed format encouraged more distinctive encoding, showing increased activation of regions associated with strategy use and visual processing (e.g., frontal and visual cortices, respectively). Alternatively, the blocked format exhibited increased gist-based processes, accompanied by increased activity in the right inferior frontal gyrus. Together, results suggest that the sequence that information is presented during encoding affects the degree to which distinctive encoding is engaged. These findings extend our understanding of the Fuzzy Trace Theory and the role of presentation format on encoding processes.

Examining the effects of pleasantness ratings on correct and false recognition in the DRM paradigm: accuracy, recollection and familiarity estimates.

Distinctive encoding usually increases correct recognition while also producing a reduction in false recognition. In the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) illusion this phenomenon, called the mirror effect, occurs when participants focus on unique features of each of the words in the study list. In previous studies, the pleasantness rating task, used to foster distinctive encoding, generated different patterns of results. The main aim of our research is to examine under what circumstances this task can produce the mirror effect in the DRM paradigm, based on evidence from recognition accuracy and subjective retrieval experience. In Experiment 1, a standard version (word pleasantness rating on a 5-point Likert-type scale) was used for comparison with two other encoding conditions: shallow processing (vowel identification) and a read-only control. The standard task, compared to the other conditions, increased correct recognition, but did not reduce false recognition, and this result may be affected by the number of lists presented for study. Therefore, in experiment 2, to minimize the possible effect of the so-called retention size, the number of studied lists was reduced. In addition, the standard version was compared with a supposedly more item-specific version (participants rated the pleasantness of words while thinking of a single reason for this), also including the read-only control condition. In both versions of the pleasantness rating task, more correct recognition is achieved compared to the control condition, with no differences between the two versions. In the false recognition observed here, only the specific pleasantness rating task achieved a reduction relative to the control condition. On the other hand, the subjective retrieval experience accompanied correct and false recognition in the various study conditions. Although the standard pleasantness rating task has been considered to perform item-specific processing, our results challenge that claim. Furthermore, we propose a possible boundary condition of the standard task for the reduction of false recognition in the DRM paradigm.

Reducing False Recognition in the Deese-Roediger/McDermott Paradigm: Related Lures Reveal How Distinctive Encoding Improves Encoding and Monitoring Processes.

In the Deese-Roediger/McDermott (DRM) paradigm, distinctive encoding of list items typically reduces false recognition of critical lures relative to a read-only control. This reduction can be due to enhanced item-specific processing, reduced relational processing, and/or increased test-based monitoring. However, it is unclear whether distinctive encoding reduces false recognition in a selective or global manner. To examine this question, participants studied DRM lists using a distinctive item-specific anagram generation task and then completed a recognition test which included both DRM critical lures and either strongly related lures (Experiment 1) or weakly related lures (Experiment 2). Compared to a read-control group, the generate groups showed increased correct recognition and decreased false recognition of all lure types. We then estimated the separate contributions of encoding and retrieval processes using signal-detection indices. Generation improved correct recognition by both increasing encoding of memory information for list words and by increasing memory monitoring at test. Generation reduced false recognition by reducing the encoding of memory information and by increasing memory monitoring at test. The reduction in false recognition was equivalent for critical lures and related lures, indicating that generation globally reduces the encoding of related non-presented items at study (not just critical lures), while globally increasing list-theme-based monitoring at test.