Loading…
An item-level analysis of lexical-semantic effects in free recall and recognition memory using the megastudy approach
Psycholinguists have developed a number of measures to tap different aspects of a word’s semantic representation. The influence of these measures on lexical processing has collectively been described as semantic richness effects. However, the effects of these word properties on memory are currently...
Saved in:
Published in: | Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) 2018-10, Vol.71 (10), p.2207-2222 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Psycholinguists have developed a number of measures to tap different aspects of a word’s semantic representation. The influence of these measures on lexical processing has collectively been described as semantic richness effects. However, the effects of these word properties on memory are currently not well understood. This study examines the relative contributions of lexical and semantic variables in free recall and recognition memory at the item-level, using a megastudy approach. Hierarchical regression of recall and recognition performance on a number of lexical-semantic variables showed task-general effects where the structural component, frequency, number of senses, and arousal accounted for unique variance in both free recall and recognition memory. Task-specific effects included number of features, imageability, and body–object interaction, which accounted for unique variance in recall, whereas age of acquisition, familiarity, and extremity of valence accounted for unique variance in recognition. Forward selection regression analyses generally converged on these findings. Hierarchical regression also revealed that lexical variables accounted for more variance in recognition compared with recall, whereas semantic variables accounted for more unique variance above and beyond lexical variables in recall compared with recognition. Implications of the findings are discussed. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1747-0218 1747-0226 |
DOI: | 10.1177/1747021817739834 |