↓ Skip to main content

Tracking the emergence of memories: A category-learning paradigm to explore schema-driven recognition

Overview of attention for article published in Memory & Cognition, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
Title
Tracking the emergence of memories: A category-learning paradigm to explore schema-driven recognition
Published in
Memory & Cognition, August 2016
DOI 10.3758/s13421-016-0643-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Felipe De Brigard, Timothy F. Brady, Luka Ruzic, Daniel L. Schacter

Abstract

Previous research has shown that prior knowledge structures or schemas affect recognition memory. However, since the acquisition of schemas occurs over prolonged periods of time, few paradigms allow the direct manipulation of schema acquisition to study their effect on memory performance. Recently, a number of parallelisms in recognition memory between studies involving schemas and studies involving category learning have been identified. The current paper capitalizes on these findings and offers a novel experimental paradigm that allows manipulation of category learning between individuals to study the effects of schema acquisition on recognition. First, participants learn to categorize computer-generated items whose category-inclusion criteria differ between participants. Next, participants study items that belong to either the learned category, the non-learned category, both, or neither. Finally, participants receive a recognition test that includes old and new items, either from the learned, the non-learned, or neither category. Using variations on this paradigm, four experiments were conducted. The results from the first three studies suggest that learning a category increases hit rates for old category-consistent items and false alarm rates for new category-consistent lures. Absent the category learning, no such effects are evident, even when participants are exposed to the same learning trials as those who learned the categories. The results from the fourth experiment suggest that, at least for false alarm rates, the effects of category learning are not solely attributable to frequency of occurrence of category-consistent items during learning. Implications for recognition memory as well as advantages of the proposed paradigm are discussed.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Russia 1 1%
Unknown 95 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 31%
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 7 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 53 54%
Neuroscience 15 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 2%
Philosophy 1 1%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 16 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,498,941
of 13,969,526 outputs
Outputs from Memory & Cognition
#229
of 1,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,946
of 265,083 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Memory & Cognition
#12
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,969,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,211 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,083 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.