TY - JOUR
T1 - Generate-Sometimes Recognize, Sometimes Not
AU - Guynn, Melissa J.
AU - McDaniel, Mark A.
PY - 1999/10
Y1 - 1999/10
N2 - We report three experiments testing the extension of Jacoby and Hollingshead's (1990) revised generate-recognize model of recall to a conceptually driven recall test. According to the model, recall involves generation of items plus recognition of some but not all generated items. Inconsistent with this model, production of high-frequency words was greater on a test that required recognition of all generated items than on a recall test (Experiments 1a and 1b), and production of low-frequency words was greater on a recall test than on a generation test that did not require a recognition check (Experiments 1a, 1b, and 2). Further, the production advantage for high-frequency over low-frequency words was greater on a test that required recognition of all generated items than on a recall test. This result is not consistent with the idea that some items are recalled without a recognition check. If so, then high-frequency words should have exhibited a greater advantage over low-frequency words on a recall test than on a test that required recognition of all generated items. The results are interpreted within the view that recall can involve using information from encoding to access target information directly at retrieval.
AB - We report three experiments testing the extension of Jacoby and Hollingshead's (1990) revised generate-recognize model of recall to a conceptually driven recall test. According to the model, recall involves generation of items plus recognition of some but not all generated items. Inconsistent with this model, production of high-frequency words was greater on a test that required recognition of all generated items than on a recall test (Experiments 1a and 1b), and production of low-frequency words was greater on a recall test than on a generation test that did not require a recognition check (Experiments 1a, 1b, and 2). Further, the production advantage for high-frequency over low-frequency words was greater on a test that required recognition of all generated items than on a recall test. This result is not consistent with the idea that some items are recalled without a recognition check. If so, then high-frequency words should have exhibited a greater advantage over low-frequency words on a recall test than on a test that required recognition of all generated items. The results are interpreted within the view that recall can involve using information from encoding to access target information directly at retrieval.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/0042129813
U2 - 10.1006/jmla.1999.2652
DO - 10.1006/jmla.1999.2652
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:0042129813
SN - 0749-596X
VL - 41
SP - 398
EP - 415
JO - Journal of Memory and Language
JF - Journal of Memory and Language
IS - 3
ER -