Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
Encoding Organizational Source and Associative Source under Incidental and Intentional Learning Conditions
Department of Psychology, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
- 1 Department of Psychology, Fudan University, Shanghai, China
Copy link · social · email
Abstract
The present study aimed at providing a plausible answer for the controversy whether organizational source or associative source could be encoded in a more automatic manner through incidental learning. In the experiment, subjects were asked to learn organizational and associative sources under incidental or intentional learning conditions. It turned out that only associative source accuracy increased when subjects were instructed to intentionally learn that source, which implied that associative source might be encoded in a more effortful way, whereas processing of organizational source might be performed incidentally.
KeywordsOrganizational SourceAssociative SourceIncidental LearningIntentional Learning
- Baddeley, A. D. (1982). Domains of recollection. Psychological Review, 89, 708-729. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.89.6.708
- Chalfonte, B. L., & Johnson, M. K. (1996). Feature memory and binding in young and older adults. Memory & Cognition, 24, 403-416. doi:10.3758/BF03200930
- Chalfonte, B. L., Verfaellie, M., Johnson, M. K., & Reiss, L. (1996). Spatial location memory in amnesia: binding item and location information under incidental and intentional encoding conditions. Memory, 4, 591-614. doi:10.1080/741940998
- Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268-294. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.104.3.268
- Ferguson, S. A., Hashtroudi, S., & Johnson, M. K. (1992). Age differences in using source-relevant cues. Psychology and Aging, 7, 443-452. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.7.3.443
- Geiselman, R. E., & Bjork, R. A. (1980). Primary versus secondary rehearsal in imagined voices: Differential effects on recognition. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 188-205. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90008-0
- Hashtroudi, S., Johnson, M. K., Vnek, N., & Ferguson, S. A. (1994). Aging and the effects of affective and factual focus on source monitoring and recall. Psychology and Aging, 9, 160-170. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.9.1.160
- Kuo, T. Y., & Van Petten, C. (2006). Prefrontal engagement during source memory retrieval depends on the prior encoding task. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 1133-1146. doi:10.1162/jocn.2006.18.7.1133
- Marsh, R. L., Hicks, J. L., & Cook, G. I. (2004). Focused attention on one contextual attribute does not reduce source memory for a different attribute. Memory, 2004, 12, 183-192. doi:10.1080/09658210344000008
- Mayr, U. (1996). Spatial attention and implicit sequence learning: Evidence for independent learning of spatial and non spatial sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 22, 350-364. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.2.350
- Moscovitch, M. (1992). Memory and working-with-memory: A component process model based on modules and central systems. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 4, 257-267. doi:10.1162/jocn.1992.4.3.257
- Rossion, B., & Pourtois, G. (2004). Revisiting Snodgrass and Vanderwart’s object set: The role of surface detail in basic-level object recognition. Perception, 33, 217-236. doi:10.1068/p5117