Using Pleasantness to Improve Memory Across Retention Intervals

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristine L. Lefeber ◽  
Jeffrey A. Gibbons
Keyword(s):  
Zebrafish ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 370-378
Author(s):  
Flavia V. Stefanello ◽  
Barbara D. Fontana ◽  
Paola R. Ziani ◽  
Talise E. Müller ◽  
Nathana J. Mezzomo ◽  
...  

2001 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean H. Searcy ◽  
James C. Bartlett ◽  
Amina Memon ◽  
Kristin Swanson
Keyword(s):  

2000 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 261-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tricia S. Clement ◽  
Thomas R. Zentall

We tested the hypothesis that pigeons could use a cognitively efficient coding strategy by training them on a conditional discrimination (delayed symbolic matching) in which one alternative was correct following the presentation of one sample (one-to-one), whereas the other alternative was correct following the presentation of any one of four other samples (many-to-one). When retention intervals of different durations were inserted between the offset of the sample and the onset of the choice stimuli, divergent retention functions were found. With increasing retention interval, matching accuracy on trials involving any of the many-to-one samples was increasingly better than matching accuracy on trials involving the one-to-one sample. Furthermore, following this test, pigeons treated a novel sample as if it had been one of the many-to-one samples. The data suggest that rather than learning each of the five sample-comparison associations independently, the pigeons developed a cognitively efficient single-code/default coding strategy.


1969 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 357-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas L. Hintzman ◽  
Robert M. Waters

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (8) ◽  
pp. 1193-1207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. Huff ◽  
Jaimie McNabb ◽  
Keith A. Hutchison
Keyword(s):  

2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 628-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Lynch ◽  
P. K. Cullen ◽  
A. M. Jasnow ◽  
D. C. Riccio

Behaviour ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 134 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 881-890 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Kunz ◽  
Anders Brodin

AbstractWe allowed seven willow tits, Parus montanus, to store and retrieve with retention intervals of 1, 7, 21 and 56 days, in four experimental rooms. Retrieval success decreased over time, indicating a decaying memory for cache locations. Compared to what could be expected by chance, retrieval success was better after all retention intervals. Our results suggest that - after the longer retention intervals - this might depend on preferences for certain types of caching locations rather than memory. If both general and individual preferences are controlled for, birds retrieved significantly better than expected one and seven days after storing, but not later than that.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Rebecca Spearing ◽  
Kimberley A. Wade

A growing body of research suggests that confidence judgements can provide a useful indicator of memory accuracy under some conditions. One factor known to affect eyewitness accuracy, yet rarely examined in the confidence-accuracy literature, is retention interval. Using calibration analyses, we investigated how retention interval affects the confidence-accuracy relationship for eyewitness recall. In total, 611 adults watched a mock crime video and completed a cued-recall test either immediately, after 1 week, or after 1 month. Long (1 month) delays led to lower memory accuracy, lower confidence judgements, and impaired the confidence-accuracy relationship compared to shorter (immediate and 1 week) delays. Long-delay participants who reported very high levels of confidence tended to be over-confident in the accuracy of their memories compared to other participants. Self-rated memory ability, however, did not predict eyewitness confidence or the confidence-accuracy relationship. We discuss the findings in relation to cue-utilization theory and a retrieval-fluency account.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document