Context Effect (CE) refers to the facilitation of memory for target information due to the similarity of contextual information available during both learning and retrieval. Many studies have attempted to identify variables that influence this effect, producing inconsistent findings due to differences in how target and context information are defined and measured. In the current study, recognition memory for faces was tested under different learning instructions and diverse context-recognition conditions. When memory instructions were used, recognition rates proved higher for the original target-context pairs than for all other possible target-context conditions. A different CE profile was observed for attentional instructions while old, yet not necessarily original, target-context faces yielded better results than other context conditions. These findings indicate that memory instructions lead to CE based on the formation of a specific association between target and context information, while instructions focusing on attentional resources lead to CE based on familiarity judgments. The double dissociation reported here is that memory instructions yield binding as opposed to familiarity type of CE, while attention instructions yield familiarity and not binding type of CE, supporting the claim that CE is not homogeneous and involves a number of cognitive processes.
KeywordsContext-EffectLearningMemoryAttention
Ahmad, F. N., & Hockley, W. E. (2014). The Role of Familiarity in the Associative Recognition of Unitized Compound Word Pairs. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 2301-2324. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.923007
Armstrong, H. A., & McKelvie, S. J. (1996). Effect of Face Context on Recognition Memory for Voices. The Journal of General Psychology, 123, 259-270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221309.1996.9921278
Baddeley, A. D. (1982). Domains of Recollection. Psychological Review, 89, 708-729. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.89.6.708
Baddeley, A. D., & Woodhead, M. (1982). Depth of Processing, Context, and Face Recognition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 36, 148-164. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0080635
Bower, G. H., & Karlin, M. B. (1974). Depth of Processing Pictures of Faces and Recognition Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 103, 751-757. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037190
Busey, T. A., Tunnicliff, J., Loftus, G. R., & Loftus, E. F. (2000). Accounts of the Confidence-Accuracy Relation in Recognition Memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 7, 26-48. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210724
Clark, S. E., & Gronlund, S. D. (1996). Global Matching Models of Recognition Memory: How the Models Match the Data. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 37-60. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03210740
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of Processing: A Framework for Memory Research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X
Davies, G., & Milne, A. (1982). Recognizing Faces In and Out of Context. Current Psychological Research, 2, 235-246. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03186766
Dennis, S., & Humphreys, M. S. (2001). A Context Noise Model of Episodic Word Recognition. Psychological Review, 108, 452-478. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.452
Feenan, K., & Snodgrass, J. G. (1990). The Effect of Context on Discrimination and Bias in Recognition Memory for Pictures and Words. Memory & Cognition, 18, 515-527. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198484
Fernandes, M., & Guild, E. (2009). Process-Specific Interference Effects during Recognition of Spatial Patterns and Words. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 6, 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012870
Foos, P. W., & Goolkasian, P. (2008). Presentation Format Effects in a Levels-of-Processing Task. Experimental Psychology, 55, 215-227. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.55.4.215
Gillund, G., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1984). A Retrieval Model for Both Recognition and Recall. Psychological Review, 91, 1-67. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.91.1.1
Giovanello, K. S., Keane, M. M., & Verfaellie, M. (2006). The Contribution of Familiarity to Associative Memory in Amnesia. Neuropsychologia, 44, 1859-1865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.03.004
Giovanello, K. S., Verfaellie, M., & Keane, M. M. (2003). Disproportionate Impairment in Associative Recognition Relative to Item Recognition in Global Amnesia. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 3, 186-194. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.3.3.186
Gruppuso, V., Lindsay, D. S., & Masson, M. E. J. (2007). I’d Know That Face Anywhere! Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1085-1089. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193095
Hayes, S. M., Nadel, L., & Ryan, L. (2007). The Effect of Scene Context on Episodic Object Recognition: Parahippocampal Cortex Mediates Memory Encoding and Retrieval Success. Hippocampus, 17, 873-889. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.20319
Hirst, W., & Volpe, B. T. (1984). Encoding of Spatial Relations with Amnesia. Neuropsychologia, 22, 631-634. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(84)90029-0
Hockley, W. E. (2008). The Effects of Environmental Context on Recognition Memory and Claims of Remembering. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 34, 1412-1429. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013016
Hollingworth, A. (2006). Scene and Position Specificity in Visual Memory for Objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 58-69. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.1.58
Humphreys, M. S., & Bain, J. D. (1983). Recognition Memory: A Cue and Information Analysis. Memory and Cognition, 11, 583-600. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198283
Hunt, R. R. (2003). Two Contributions of Distinctive Processing to Accurate Memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 811-825. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00018-4
Jacoby, L. L. (1991). A Process Dissociation Framework: Separating Automatic from Intentional Uses of Memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 513-541. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90025-F
Koriat, A., & Melkman, R. (1987). Depth of Processing and Memory Organization. Psychological Research, 49, 173-181. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00308684
Lovén, J., Herlitz, A., & Rehnman, J. (2011). Women’s Own-Gender Bias in Face Recognition Memory. Experimental Psychology, 58, 333-340. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000100
Macken, W. J. (2002). Environmental Context and Recognition: The Role of Recollection and Familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 153-161. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.1.153
Martinez, A. M., & Benavente, R. (1998). The AR Face Database. CVC Technical Report No. 24.
Mayes, A. R., MacDonald, C., Donlan, L., Pears, J., & Meudell, P. R. (1992). Amnesics Have a Disproportionately Severe Memory Deficit for Interactive Context. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 265-297. https://doi.org/10.1080/14640749208401327
Meltzer, J. A., & Constable, R. T. (2005). Activation of Human Hippocampal Formation Reflects Success in Both Encoding and Cued Recall of Paired Associates. NeuroImage, 24, 384-397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.09.001
Murnane, K., & Phelps, M. P. (1993). A Global Activation Approach to the Effect of Changes in Environmental Context on Recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 882-894. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.19.4.882
Murnane, K., & Phelps, M. P. (1994). When Does a Different Environmental Context Make a Difference in Recognition? A Global Activation Model. Memory & Cognition, 22, 584-590. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198397
Murnane, K., Phelps, M. P., & Malmberg, K. (1999). Context-Dependent Recognition Memory: The ICE Theory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 403-415. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.128.4.403
Parker, A., & Gellatly, A. (1997). Movable Cues: A Practical Method for Reducing Context-Dependent Forgetting. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 163-173. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(199704)11:2 3.0.CO;2-1
Priestley, N. M., & Mayes, A. R. (1992). Preservation of Priming for Interactive Context in Amnesics. Cortex, 28, 555-574. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-9452(13)80227-4
Reder, L. M., Donavos, D. K., & Erickson, M. A. (2002). Perceptual Match Effects in Direct Tests of Memory: The Role of Contextual Fan. Memory & Cognition, 30, 312-323. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195292
Reingold, E. M., & Goshen-Gottstein, Y. (1996). Separating Consciously Controlled and Automatic Influences in Memory for New Associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 397-406. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.22.2.397
Rotello, C. M., & Heit, E. (2000). Two-Process Models of Recognition Memory: Evidence for Recall-to-Reject? Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 432-453. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2623
Russo, R., Ward, G., Geurts, H., & Scheres, A. (1999). When Unfamiliarity Matters: Changing Environmental Context between Study and Test Affects Recognition Memory for Unfamiliar Stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 488-499. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.25.2.488
Smith, S. M. (1979). Remembering in and out of Context. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5, 460-471. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.5.5.460
Smith, S. M., & Vela, E. (2001). Environmental Context-Dependent Memory: A Review and Meta-Analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 8, 203-220. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196157
Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of Measuring Recognition Memory: Applications to Dementia and Amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 34-50. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.117.1.34
Stark, C. E., & Squire, L. R. (2003). Hippocampal Damage Equally Impairs Memory for Single Items and Memory for Conjunctions. Hippocampus, 13, 281-292. https://doi.org/10.1002/hipo.10085
Steyvers, M., & Malmberg, K. J. (2003). The Effect of Normative Context Variability on Recognition Memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 760-766. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.29.5.760
Taconnat, L., Froger, C., Sacher, M., & Isingrini, M. (2008). Generation and Associative Encoding in Young and Old Adults: The Effect of the Strength of Association between Cues and Targets on a Cued Recall Task. Experimental Psychology, 55, 23-30. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169.55.1.23
Tulving, E., & Thomson, D. M. (1971). Retrieval Processes in Recognition Memory: Effects of Associative Context. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 87, 116-124. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030186
Tunney, R. J., Mullett, T. L., Moross, C. J., & Gardner, A. (2012). Does the Butcher-on-the-Bus Phenomenon Require a Dual-Process Explanation? A Signal Detection Analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 208. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00208
Vakil, E., & Oded, Y. (2003). Comparison between Three Memory Tests: Cued Recall, Priming and Saving Closed-Head Injured Patients and Controls. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 25, 274-282. https://doi.org/10.1076/jcen.25.2.274.13637
Vakil, E., Raz, T., & Levy, D. A. (2007). Multifactorial Context Effects on Visual Recognition Memory. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 916-923. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210701357568
Watkins, M. J., Ho, E., & Tulving, E. (1976). Context Effects in Recognition Memory for Faces. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 15, 505-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5371(76)90045-1
Winograd, E., & Rivers-Bulkeley, N. T. (1977). Effects of Changing Context on Remembering Faces. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human, Learning and Memory, 3, 397-405. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.3.4.397
Wright, D. B., & Sladden, B. (2003). An Own Gender Bias and the Importance of Hair in Face Recognition. Acta Psychologica, 114, 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(03)00052-0
Yonelinas, A. P., Kroll, N. E. A., Dobbins, I. G., & Soltani, M. (1999). Recognition Memory for Faces: When Familiarity Supports Associative Recognition Judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6, 654-661. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03212975